So it turns out the story about the French blocking Morales' plane was total bullshit - LMAO!!!

[Cali_Democrat]

Looks like all the whining and crying last night was over a bullshit story.

France didn't block Bolivia plane

ARIS (AP) — Bolivia's president left Europe for home on Wednesday amid diplomatic drama, a day after his flight was rerouted and delayed in Austria amid suggestions that he was trying to spirit NSA leaker Edward Snowden to Latin America.

Bolivia demanded explanation from various European countries it accused of thwarting President Evo Morales' flight.

French officials denied Wednesday that France refused to let the plane cross over its airspace amid suspicions that Snowden was aboard. Spain, too, said the plane was free to cross its territory.

http://news.yahoo.com/snowden-case-france-didnt-block-bolivia-plane-101339698.html

But it's not about France or Spain!11!(one)11!!

ODS taken to new levels.

Oh ya.

[Arctic Dave]

1. Riiiight.

It was just made up.

No! No! It was a "rumor".

Next bullshit asscovering story: it was a misunderstanding, lost in translation.

Derp derp derp.

[Tarheel_Dem]

2. It's always the initial lie that gets the biggest headlines, and the most fake outrage. ODS should

be classified as a crippling disorder, and treated aggressively.

[Whisp]

4. how many times have we all seen this?

and some fish keep on taking the bait, over and over and over...

with crossed fingers that some Catastrophe is about to happen, and the U.S. (Obama) is gonna get spanked real hard.

just wishin', and hopin'

I don't understand.

[Tarheel_Dem]

20. I admit, most of the time I just LMAO at the sheer foolishness. At what point is there poutrage....

overload? It can't be good for one's health, which is why I don't take them seriously. The good news is that the foolishness is fairly well contained "Underground". If these keyboard commandoes were as fierce as they seem to think, then our streets would look like Tahrir Square. You know us Americans, we hate everything, until it requires us having to leave the comfort of our favorite Barcalounger. It's the reason Occupy has been such a flop. Our wannabe "anti-authoritarians" are just spoiled rotten.

[flamingdem]

25. Too true, we are the Tahir of the internet here

at DU!

[Hissyspit]

28. See posts 5 & 13.

[zappaman]

22. +100

I think some people want "the empire to crumble" or some sort of catastrophe to happen just so everyone else can be as miserable as they are.

[flamingdem]

26. I think that we should fill DU

up with flags and patriotic songs on the 4th of July just to needle certain sectors here

[Hissyspit]

32. That's stupid.

And considering that your post is making fun of people for blindly accepting stuff, why did you blindly accept what France said?

"Why did they do that? Because it's what they wanted to believe."

[zappaman]

33. That's not something I normally do.

But I always find it funny when someone sees or hears something patriotic and gets upset.
What's the big deal if you love living in your particular country?

[Hissyspit]

36. Because patriotism and nationalism produce certain kinds of

blindness? Because patriotism and nationalism are tool of tribal manipulation? Did you miss the Bush era?

[zappaman]

37. I don't know if they produce blindness...

I think it's already there and that's just a convenient cover.

[Hissyspit]

39. Which is another reason people are suspicious of its use as a language.

The poster you responded to, themself, is calling for the symbolism to be used as mocking dialogue instead of as a pure expression of pride.

[Bobbie Jo]

48. but, but....Snowden is a Patriot!1!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3135902

Interesting use of language, no?

[zappaman]

52. Oh brother...

[flamingdem]

69. More like Paul Revere's

rear! ouch

Even Lon Snowden the dad is calling his son Paul Revere, way to help his megalomania disorder!

where's my piccolo

[Hissyspit]

85. You do realize you are proving my point?

[Bobbie Jo]

96. Yes.

Do you?

[zappaman]

55. But why let it bother you?

It only works as mocking if someone gets upset by it.
If my neighbor flies a flag or dances around in his front yard in his tight-whiteys while singing God Bless America, I couldn't care less.

Okay...if he does the tight-whitey thing I'll probably be a little bothered...

[Hissyspit]

61. It's complicated and it's not necessarily about being bothered.

A neighbor flying a flag doesn't "bother" me necessarily as much as the symbols being used in the way the poster suggests, sounding suspiciously like the tactics of jingoism, intended to shut down dialogue as "anti-American."

[flamingdem]

71. Oh my lawd, I hope he's a

Democrat - You never know

[MicaelS]

74. I'd rather have Patriotism and Nationalism than the opposite.

Which is the club of Americans who despise America, because America isn't as perfect as they think she ought to be. The club of "Blame America First, Last and Always". The club of no matter what America does as a nation, America is wrong. If we do nothing we're wrong. If we do something, then we're probably wrong, because we didn't do enough, or we did too much.

One of the reasons the pendulum swung back to the Right in the 1980s, and Reagan got elected twice, was because a lot of people in this country got tired of the unceasing complaints and criticism of this country from the Left. No one likes to be criticized, and NO ONE is going to tolerant unceasing criticism without saying ENOUGH at some point.

[Hissyspit]

77. So it's either/or?

No, it's not, actually.

[KittyWampus]

113. Oh, you mean the Noam Chomsky Club, right?

[Mojorabbit]

67. I take back my compliment from last night

This kind of post does nothing to facilitate conversation and is the same type of tactics used by your compatriots on the board. It is like watching a bunch of junior high kids let loose.

[flamingdem]

73. Sorry, I'm not above that

But at least my antics have a point. I am patriotic and I defend my Potus

[A Simple Game]

81. Whew, you must have had a hard time here for your first few months here

before President Obama took office.

[randome]

27. Which is why we live in a dangerous time.

It's amazing we've gone this long in a crappy economy without long-lasting heroes to rise up and get things done.

We are ripe for the advent of false leaders such as Rand Paul yet even the Libertarians can't seem to get a foothold on matters.

There is a hell of a lot of pent-up frustration just waiting to be focused. We'll be lucky, I think, if that focus turns out to be for the greater good and not some cult-style 'hero'.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[zappaman]

30. True.

I find the Pauls to be very scary.
But I also try not to miss any opportunity to say

FUCK RON PAUL AND HIS FUCKING KID TOO!

[flamingdem]

40. +1

Okay I won't post giant flags and marching music tomorrow..

[Mojorabbit]

68. I have yet to see anyone lionize Rand Paul on this board

and most Republicans I know can't stand him either. It is possible a charismic leader will emerge but it sure as hell will not be Rand Paul. nt

[randome]

79. I think you're right, it won't be either of the Pauls.

But they typify, to me, the kind of fake leader who can emerge and direct all this dissatisfaction -which is real- into directions that benefit a more nefarious agenda.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[CakeGrrl]

72. Yes. If only some here understood where the REAL fight lies.

But I guess if one has somehow been convinced that "Obama = Bush or WORSE", then it's a lost cause in those cases.

Anchors on progress are being thrown from all sides.

[flamingdem]

75. Why can't we unite to fight the right wing in the USA

and the teaparty.

A no brainer lost on many DUers who want to attack potus for real and nefarious reasons

[Aerows]

109. Many of us

disagree with what is "Right Wing". For instance, many of us think that going along to get along with violations of the Constitution are right wing, but hey, we all differ.

[GoneFishin]

129. Defending executions without a trial seems right-wing to me.

[Number23]

112. In all seriousness, I think you are absolutely right

want "the empire to crumble" or some sort of catastrophe to happen just so everyone else can be as miserable as they are.

I have said that and felt that way for a very long time. One of the reasons Prosense hit the nail on the head with her "it's hate, period" OP.

[LondonReign2]

84. So the French just issued an apology for blocking his plane

but all means, carry on with the "this is all a fake" narrative

[sibelian]

95. NOW do you understand?

[think]

3. Morales is laughing this off too

NOT

[Pholus]

5. The followup question is the tell...

Not that "Yahoo News" worries about things like that. It's just furriners after all.

"The permission for overflight was indeed given," foreign ministry spokesman Philippe Lalliot said but refused to confirm reports that it had not been initially granted.

http://www.thelocal.fr/20130703/snowden-affair-bolivia-furious-with-france

[Cali_Democrat]

6. So because they refused to confirm reports, it means they did deny the flight?

[Warren Stupidity]

8. no it means that the president of a sovereign nation was humiliated

and you think it is a big fucking joke.

[Cali_Democrat]

17. Nice try, Warren, but I'm not laughing at Bolivia or their leader

I'm laughing at all the nitwits who swallowed this story whole hog without waiting for the facts to emerge.

Why did they do that? Because it's what they wanted to believe.

Par for the course.

[flamingdem]

31. Over at the Guardian they were breathlessly "live blogging" the event

One reporter (really just a twitterer) said that that Spain had to consult with their friends in the USA before allowing the Bolivian plane to fly through.

The facts were:

Spain had let them refuel and didn't block them
Spain didn't get the drama and said "yeah call us back at 9am if there's a problem"

So the Bolivian minister ran with that as Spain is blocking us and we're waiting for their reply!

He was just waiting for them to get to work and stick to the 9am call time

[zappaman]

44. But...but

We are going to war over this!
And Latin America is gonna stop all trade!
It's a disaster I tells ya!

[flamingdem]

49. In Russian this says - Lassie: Imperialist Running Dog!

?zz=1

[Whisp]

60. gee, I wonder who that Guardian blogger could be....

has the foul odour of GG and his sockpuppets.

I read something the other day that that is what he does, makes socks to support his own arguments. I don't have a link but he is the sort of shitty character that Would do that and I find it believable.

[flamingdem]

63. Interesting. It stinks of disinfo mostly by the facts they omit

It's got a slant that is very GG and supports his whole trip so I bet you're right!

What else does he have to do all day in Brazil, guy is keepin busy

[Whisp]

65. In this instant bloggertwitter day, it probably wouldn't be all that difficult

to arrange a lie like what was done last night.

Have a few people support you, and voila, viral. The lie becomes certain - until the next day or so when things get straightened out, but we know how that works. It never gets straightened out in some minds. Some here are still convinced that Obama had scrambled jets for brekkie today.

oiy.

[LondonReign2]

111. Who's the nitwit now?

You know, with France apologizing for blocking their airspace and all...?

[Pholus]

13. Apparently the answer is "initially" since it consistent with all three French official statements.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_23590259/snowden-france-denies-blocking-bolivian-plane

French President Francois Hollande, speaking at a press conference in Berlin, attempted to clear up confusion about whether or not France had refused Morales' plane access to its airspace.

"There was contradictory information about the identity of the passengers aboard one or two aircraft, because there was also a doubt about the number of planes that wanted to fly over France," he said. "As soon as I knew that it was the plane of Bolivia's president, I immediately gave my authorization for the overflight."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/03/edward-snowden-asylum-live

French government spokeswoman Najat Vallaud-Belkacem said: "France ended up authorising the flight over its airspace by Mr Morales's plane." She said that the plane was "authorised to fly over French territory", but wouldn't say whether there had been an initial refusal last night.

And my initial quote, which by the way PREDATES both the others.

[Ichingcarpenter]

23. Important post they did stop it

but backtracked on it diplomatically .


OP's post is destroyed as a fabrication

Like they guy who slammed you into the wall and said sorry I didn't know it was you.



France knows how to play the diplomatic game.

Diplomacy means the art of nearly deceiving all your friends, but not quite deceiving all your enemies.


Diplomacy is to do and say the nastiest things in the nicest way.

[ljm2002]

35. So the statement by Hollande...

...confirms that permission was NOT given initially.

"There was contradictory information about the identity of the passengers aboard one or two aircraft, because there was also a doubt about the number of planes that wanted to fly over France," he said. "As soon as I knew that it was the plane of Bolivia's president, I immediately gave my authorization for the overflight."

In other words: the overflight was NOT authorized and it was the President of France who later gave authorization.

I did not know that heads of state were responsible for giving specific authorization of diplomatic flights within their airspace.

I suspect that the President of France was involved because this was a high-profile case.

That does not at all support the thesis that the flight was authorized.

But then again: do we really think that Morales' pilot just out of the blue thought he couldn't fly over Spain and Portugal and France? Really, do some of you think that?

[Savannahmann]

47. To defend the authoritarian governments of the world.

Some here would insist that the pilot just suddenly decided to make a U turn in mid air, land at Vienna because he wanted some of the famed Vienna Sausages of lore and legend.

The really distressing thing here is not the plethora of excuses, but how thin the excuses appear to even the most basic of critical thought. Presidential Planes do not make unscheduled stops on a whim. Presidents are always on a schedule, a schedule set up weeks in advance in many cases. They don't make unscheduled diverts without some good reasons.

So what happened? Someone decided that Snowden was possibly on the plane. Portugal knowing they were between a rock and hard place bowed out. They said the plane could not land, because if it did they would be creating an international incident of epic proportions to search the plane, and if Snowden was on the plane, would be able to do nothing about it, since that would in effect be Bolivian Territory on a Diplomatic mission. Darn those international treaties on such things interfering with the power of authority.

Spain said no, France said no. Italy said no. Austria said yes, but still wrangled an agreement to search the plane for the lying little punk (according to the same apologists who swear none of this happened). In the mean time the information is filtering up the chain of Government, and France's President said holy crap, you can't do that, let him through. By that time, the plane was already on the ground in Austria.

Last night, it was purported that the plane refueled in Spain, but since the flight path of the plane doesn't go over France, much less Spain which for the Geographically challenged is beyond France from Austria, then that seems unlikely to say the least.

Besides, why would a plane that is now just over five thousand miles from home, turn around, and go nearly a thousand miles in the wrong direction? I know, critical thought is apparently not one of the skills of the apologists. They're good at the rolling on the ground smileys, and the insulting comments, but not so much with the whole critical thought thing.

As nations became aware of what was going on in the middle of the night, their responsible leaders changed their underwear, and demanded that this all go away, and for the love of God do not say anything about denying a Presidential flight.

Somebody twisted a bunch of arms in the middle of the night, and that somebody was probably us. It is the one common denominator that makes any sense, not that anything is this debacle makes much sense.

It took a couple hours for the decision to flow upwards far enough before someone would say yes, let the plane through. Two hours is a long time while your plane is burning fuel, which is in a limited supply on a plane by the way. It violates I don't know how many international treaties and agreements. But according to the apologists, none of that happened. Everyone is overreacting. Yeah. Who do you think South America is going to believe? My money is on the locals there believing their own elected representatives over a bunch of nothing to see here apologists for the colonial mentality.

There will be some pain for the Europeans over this, I'm betting that some of the assets of the Europeans are nationalized within sixty days, any takers?

[Mojorabbit]

76. +1000 nt

[pscot]

107. It's unpatriotic to think

on the eve of the Glorious Fourth of July. Turn in your flag lapel pin.

[WovenGems]

57. The timeline will tell

If a real investigation is done the timeline will be just way too cool.

[Pholus]

59. I agree that it would be cool!

But I think there is sufficient egg on sufficient faces, that all involved will chuckle nervously and change the topic as rapidly as possible.

[PoliticAverse]

83. No it's because France admitted they didn't give him permission...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-23174874

Ministry spokesman Philippe Lalliot said: "The foreign minister called his Bolivian counterpart to tell him
about France's regrets after the incident caused by the late confirmation of permission for President Morales'
plane to fly over territory."

[Downwinder]

15. While you wait for clearance you are burning up fuel

and running out of airspace. No place to pull over.

[Warren Stupidity]

7. Isn't it hysterical how we can shit on the leaders of the "little" nations?

Last edited Wed Jul 3, 2013, 08:52 PM - Edit history (1)

We are so strong and powerful.

[think]

9. +1

[leftstreet]

18. +1

[magellan]

19. +1

[markpkessinger]

70. +1 n/t

[AlinPA]

10. ODS = ?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

11. Obama Derangement Syndrome

similar to the BDS conservatives accused progressives of when Bush was overreaching as president.

It is meant as a way to cut off debate about how good or bad of a job Obama and his administration is doing on a particular topic.

[AlinPA]

14. Thanks.

[morningfog]

64. It is projection. From one obsessed with a personality onto anyone who disagrees with them.

[DesMoinesDem]

12. It turns out the story about the NSA spying on us was total bullshit - LMAO!!!

“Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?” Clapper replied, “No sir … not wittingly".

Do you always immediately believe what government officials say?

[LanternWaste]

16. I'm glad no one on DU had been calling for the return of Freedom Fries prior to this new development

I'm glad no one on DU had been calling for the return of Freedom Fries prior to this new development. That would have been embarrassing...

[sabrina 1]

29. Not as embarrassing as those cheering for the detention of Morales' plane. But now apparently

understanding the seriousness of such a move and how badly it would reflect on the US, rushing to claim 'it never happened'.

It's hilarious to just read DU these days. You could get whiplash trying to keep up with is great one minute, then not great after wiser heads point out why it is not good, then back to 'it never happened, it was those who hate America who WANTED it to happen'.

What's sad is that anyone here cheered on the detention of the plane of a democratically elected leader of a sovereign state to begin with. Without a clue as to what a disaster that would be, not just for the US, but for International diplomatic affairs.

Same thing when the Brits thought they could just invade the Ecuadoran Embassy and had to be reigned in NOT just because of Ecuador, but because of International relations everywhere. That too was cheered on by people who appear to be so blinded by partisanship, or 'false patriotism' it is scary.

[Sheepshank]

21. Some ravers and their "sycophantile" groupies may want to revise some of posts on other threads

There was a whole lot of heaping crap on Obama...yet again. No matter how may times they were reminded that tripping overthemselves over heresay is a bad idea, for some reason it was imperative that they jump on that bandwagon heading for the cliff.

I wonder if eating a little crow helps to sprout survival wings?

[flamingdem]

34. Yes, I don't see the hysterics from yesterday offering to even change their opinion!

Somehow the USA is still kidnapping Morales

[muriel_volestrangler]

42. Since we now have confirmation from the French president that permission was initially denied

you should withdraw that "hysterics" insult, if you have any integrity whatsoever.

[flamingdem]

43. Oh really, I've read about 18 different accounts nt

[muriel_volestrangler]

53. Yes, really - see reply #13

If you claim that the French president has said something tyhat contradicts that, then link to it.

You're hysterical. But not in a good way.

[flamingdem]

58. Solid proof? I'll wait and see. I am not hysterical like the people who

were posting all kinds of bs regarding this matter.

I knew it was a wait and see not a hijack of Morales plane as was claimed, and etc.

[frylock]

98. France Apologies for Delaying Bolivia Presidential Flight

PARIS--French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius Wednesday evening apologized to Bolivia for closing its airspace to Bolivian President Evo Morales Tuesday evening when many suspected the Bolivian presidential jet might have been carrying National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden.

In an official statement, Mr. Fabius said he gave his Bolivian counterpart David Choquehuanca all the "necessary clarifications," though he didn't elaborate on the reasons why the French authorities denied Mr. Morales's presidential jet the right to cross France.

"There was, naturally, never any intention to block the access to our air space to the plane of President Morales, who is still welcome in our country," the Foreign Ministry said in an official statement sent by email.

Mr. Morales, who was on his way back to Bolivia after attending a summit of gas-exporting countries in Russia, was forced to land in Austria and spend the night in the Vienna airport after France and other European countries denied his plane authorization to fly over their territory.

Hours before taking off from Moscow, Mr. Morales had said his country was ready to analyze a political asylum request from Mr. Snowden. The former NSA contractor has been stuck in a transit zone in Moscow's international airport since flying to Russia from Hong Kong late last month. Mr. Snowden has been wanted by the U.S. after he admitted to leaking information about secret surveillance programs run by the NSA.

French officials at first denied France had closed its airspace to Mr. Morales.

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20130703-708369.html

[Hissyspit]

62. And automatically believed one?

[kiva]

130. But, but, but...

that one was correct!!!!!

[LondonReign2]

118. You're going to have to tell us how that eating crow

is working out for you

[ProSense]

24. We'll see.

"So it turns out the story about the French blocking Morales' plane was total bullshit - LMAO!!!"

As they say, the story is evolving. It always does.

Remember when many people were waving the fake travel document and snark by Ecuador's President Correa as the last word?

Ecuador to US: Go f*** yourself.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/27/1219373/-Ecuador-to-US-Go-f-yourself

Within days, the story unraveled.

Ecuador threatens legal action against leaker of invalid travel document for Snowden
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023114430

Ecuadoran President Correa Gives VP Biden An Earful
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023130093

Ecuador

No. The president, Rafael Correa, said he was not considering Snowden's asylum request. In an interview with the Guardian, Correa said Snowden would have to reach Ecuadorean territory before the country would consider any asylum request. The US has cancelled Snowden's passport, and Correa said his government would not give Snowden an authorised travel document to extract himself from Moscow airport. "The right of asylum request is one thing, but helping someone travel from one country to another – Ecuador has never done this."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/02/edward-snowden-nsa-asylum-application-list-countries

Ecuador Defends Domestic Surveillance

<...>

Cléver Jiménez, a member of Ecuador’s legislature who was sued in 2011 for libeling President Rafael Correa and was recently sentenced to 18 months in prison for the same offense, released a statement on Thursday criticizing the government for its involvement with Snowden and WikiLeaks in light of its own surveillance practices, calling them an “attack on civilian security and the human rights of Ecuadoreans.”

Jiménez called the situation with Snowden and Julian Assange, who has been living at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London for over a year, a “smokescreen to distract the world and the country from the serious corruption of the government.”

Jiménez criticized Correa’s government for the documents published by BuzzFeed, finding the letter related to a possible drone deal to be most alarming.

“An alarming detail is that this last purchase is for the creation of drones, unmanned aerial vehicles, which are used for surveillance programs,” Jiménez said.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/ecuador-defends-domestic-surveillance

The Errors of Edward Snowden and His Global Hypocrisy Tour
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002311287272

Here we go again.

Why are countries still cooperating with the United States on Snowden?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023156720

[flamingdem]

38. Let's hope this all leads to better, not worse relations between

South American countries and the USA. Maybe the South can see for themselves how reactive politics can hurt them and it's not worth the populist payoff.

Ecuador can lead the way to improved relations. We all need this to prevent further environment destruction as the Chinese move in and gobble up resources in the Amazon. It's very important to improve these relationships. There's a right wing sector in congress that is trying to undermine left wing governments in South America, but we'll all end up hurt by that. (See Sen. Robert Menendez threats to Pres. Correa of a week ago, yes a Democrat is as nasty as the right wing Cuban-Americans on issues relating to the South).

Correa got his PhD here in the USA, I'm sure he's smart enough to see what's best for all concerned. Let's hope considering he's willing to allow deals through that are environmentally damaging in the extreme. Perhaps there's a way to impact those decisions.

If the USA has leverage in South America we're all better off and the right wing Cuban-American contingent will be better kept in check.

[magellan]

41. Well, well. State Dept confirms the US has been in contact with overflight countries

Our Washington bureau chief, Dan Roberts, has been at the State Department briefing. Spokeswoman Jen Psaki has confirmed that the US has been in contact with countries that had a "chance" of Snowden flying through their air space:

We have been in contact with a range of countries that had a chance of having Snowden land or travel through their country but I am not going to outline what those countries were or when this [contact] happened.

She refused to confirm or deny any specific involvement with Morale's flight or address questions on whether it was a breach of diplomatic protocol, saying these were matters for Europeans to address.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/03/edward-snowden-asylum-live

[flamingdem]

45. This "in contact" was related to asylum requests not to Evo Morales flight to Bolivia

But go ahead and fall for the spin

[Pholus]

50. For anyone thinking of taking the parent seriously....

follow the link and read the title.

Fail.

[flamingdem]

51. The Guardian is slanting coverage on this for obvious reasons

Try finding the same information elsewhere if you want to avoid the hysteria hate Yankee bullshit

[Pholus]

54. Yes, that's it.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/23/us-usa-security-flight-idUSBRE95M02H20130623

Note that the link is two weeks old. Two weeks ago, this was said:

The United States continued efforts to prevent Snowden from gaining asylum. It warned Western Hemisphere nations that Snowden "should not be allowed to proceed in any further international travel, other than is necessary to return him to the United States," a State Department official said.

[flamingdem]

56. My point is that she said today that the US had nothing to do with the Bolivian plane incident

But yes they have over this period been in touch with any country that could facilitate his escape.

two different things!!!

[muriel_volestrangler]

123. No, she didn't say "the US had nothing to do with the Bolivian plane incident"

She refused to say whether the US had asked for airspace to be denied, and said the question should be directed to the other countries, since it would have finally been them who made the decision.

QUESTION: Question: Did the U.S. have any role in encouraging Western European countries to block the flight of the Bolivian President yesterday? Was there any communication between the U.S. and those countries in the affair?

MS. PSAKI: Well, as you know because we’ve talked about it quite a bit in here, the U.S. has been in touch – the United States, I should say, officials – have been in touch with a broad range of countries over the course of the last 10 days. And we haven’t – I haven’t listed those countries; I’m certainly not going to do that today.

Our position on Mr. Snowden has also been crystal clear in terms of what we want to happen, and that message has been communicated both publicly and privately in a range of these conversations we’ve had with countries. And let me just repeat: He’s been accused of leaking classified information. He’s been charged with three felony accounts and should be returned to the United States. I don’t know that any country doesn’t think that that is what the United States would like to happen.

The public – many – the public – but decisions made over the course of the last week or so, whether they’re public comments about whether or not they’ll accept asylum – his asylum request, or whether it’s closing airspace, are decisions made by individual countries. And I would point you to them to describe why they made decisions if they made decisions, and I know there have already been a range of public comments out there.

QUESTION: There’s been a great deal of criticism though from Latin American leaders about the decision, not least because Snowden doesn’t appear to have been on board. You don’t sound like you’re denying that there were conversations about this. I mean, they – a number of Latin American leaders today have specifically criticized the U.S. for intervening in a diplomatic flight. Are you – am I right in understanding you’re not denying there were conversations about that?

MS. PSAKI: I’m not going to get into diplomatic conversations that happened over the past 10 days and which countries they were with, but I would point you to the countries that you’re referring to and ask you to ask them about decisions that were made.

QUESTION: But Jen, were you in communication with those countries or alerted to the fact that they would be either – well, not allowing a certain plane to land – the President’s plane?

MS. PSAKI: We have been in contact with a range of countries across the world who had any chance of having Mr. Snowden land or even transit through their countries, but I’m not going to outline when those were or what those countries have been.
...
QUESTION: Can you say whether the United States or whether you are aware that the U.S. Government ever at some point had any information that Snowden might be on this plane?

MS. PSAKI: I’m not aware of – I’m not aware of, but not something I would get into even if I did know.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2013/07/211535.htm

It's all a big 'no comment'. And a confirmation that they'll never answer questions on it in a press briefing.

[dkf]

80. Smoking gun.

It's scary how easy it is for a certain crowd to swallow this stuff.

Suspension of disbelief runs rampant.

[Tarheel_Dem]

78. It's the Guardian, so it must be true. No agenda there. Nope. None.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

92. It is, in fact, true. Truth doesn't give a damn how bootlickers feel about it.

[Tarheel_Dem]

101. Ooohhhh, "bootlickers". Count me as "DisgustipatedinNC".

Is somebody a little cranky? Here, maybe this'll help.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

103. So counted. Thanks for the binky.

[randome]

46. So there is a conspiracy if the conspirators admit to one?

Or maybe that's a double-feint? Of course the U.S. is talking with other countries. They have a rogue contractor spilling classified documents all over the place.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[ieoeja]

66. The story is that they refused permission to "land for refueling" not that thing you just quoted.

I believe that "landing" and "flying over" are too distinctly different things.

But that is just my opinion.

[PoliticAverse]

82. Actually it is your post that is BS - France admits permission was denied, apologizes...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-23174874

Ministry spokesman Philippe Lalliot said: "The foreign minister called his Bolivian counterpart to tell him
about France's regrets after the incident caused by the late confirmation of permission for President Morales'
plane to fly over territory."

[pa28]

86. Kick for visibility.

[Maven]

87. Well now that France has apologized for it, and you've been shown to be a complete and utter fool

Will you also have the decency to issue a mea culpa?

[QC]

88. No. n/t

[Enrique]

105. more tool than fool

imho

[cherokeeprogressive]

119. Not until it's authorized... LOL. n/t

[MisterP]

89. BOOM haha lol

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-23174874
http://globalnews.ca/news/688968/bolivia-plane-incident-infuriates-latin-america/
but I'm interested in the OP's motivation: did they really think that *this time around* the whole NSA/Snowden/Morales/Greenwald story would come apart entirely, revealing the spying, the admissions of spying, coverup, and lying, and the Bolivian derailment-in-the-sky to be far, far smaller stories than the putative right-left-media alliance made them out to be: that *finally* the "extreme left" would have the "egg on their face" that the conservadems have yearned for ever since the 'Nam protests of 1965, something to finally justify the *decades* of emotional investment spent viciously slamming anyone trying to keep the Dem party to the left of Francisco Franco--something to finally out the hippies as authoritarians, to finally prove that the Cold War was worth it, to finally unmask the Commies that control academia three decades after the Velvet Revolution, to finally uncover that one shred of evidence that the left caused 2000 and 2010, to finally show that Iraq and Lebanon were Nader's fault and not the compulsive toadies and weekend warriors who *voted to support those wars*
OTOH, if the OP is just constantly scramming to send "chaff" posts far and wide, *knowing* that they'll be knocked down, debunked, publicly mocked, and dragged into the open as punchlines of how nauseatingly low one has to stoop to defend Bushit policies like these--why would anyone go through that, week after week?
neither of these alternatives seems likely--and both are far less likely than "they're paid" or "for the lulz"
it's like they believe they've been proven right after claiming that NDAA didn't cover Americans, that drones don't target responders, that the WH isn't pushing chained CPI or carrying water for Wall Street, munitions, and Wellpont, that Obama really and truly is the bankers' worst enemy, etc., etc.: the crowing, triumphant tone is just so baffling!

[Hooray for Pepe]

90. kick

For exposure.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

91. Uh oh. Looks like you're completely fucking wrong. Again.

[Marr]

120. Isn't it sickening? They go from castigating critics for not admitting they were wrong, to

disappearing in a puff of chickenshit when it's shown that it was in fact they who were wrong.

They are as profoundly hypocritical as any right-wing blowhard I've ever seen.

[Puglover]

132. +1000!

[Fumesucker]

93. He who laughs last laughs the longest

[Warren Stupidity]

94. K&R for the sheer delight of your being so totally fucking betrayed by the fucking French.

I think your best play at this point is SELF DELETE. This could stay kicked forever.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

97. Cali Democrat has thoroughly discredited himself, which is useful to remember

There are a few others who have done the same. In some cases, posters are lying on purpose. In other cases, they're clinging to the slightest scrap of gossip or innuendo and acting as though they had established facts on their side. When these people post in the future, they need to be reminded that a liar's words are of no value. That's what ends up happening with dishonest people. Yesterday, I spent far too much time trying to "convince" another poster about a factual thing from Nazi Germany. The proof is all over the Internet, and in every Holocaust book ever written, but this poster was serially incapable of backing down and letting it go. He looked very foolish, and he exposed himself as a liar. Personally, my policy is to admit it when I find out I'm wrong about,something. It serves to stop the bleeding, and it lets people know that you're honest in your dealings. Of course, it does take just a little gumption to step out there and admit you're wrong. I suspect that his element is what's lacking in this thread.

[frylock]

100. it exposes an utter lack of character on their part..

I think I just kicked this again. oops.

[GoneFishin]

131. Yep. You can smell a liar after a few posts. Intransigent in the face of proof

to the contrary.

One by one their arguments fall, and they circle back to the first already discredited argument.

Or their talking point is discredited in one thread. But they re-use it farther down in the thread, or in another thread.

It's pathetic really.

After I have given them time to out themselves, I remember who they are and put them on virtual ignore : I just skip over their comments and OPs when I see their avatar.

[frylock]

99. kicking and reccing for exposure..

come on gang, let's get this one on the front page. LMAO, indeed.

[tularetom]

102. What the hell does a story about France have to do with ODS?

That's a stretch worthy of this guy

[LittleBlue]

104. LOL @ OP

Stop posting propaganda, you're embarrassing yourself.

[HooptieWagon]

106. Kick.

Keeping OP's foolishness and discredited lies on front page.

[Aerows]

108. Some folks don't know when to admit

it when they are wrong. Hell, even the French apologized, and this is the line you are going with, "They didn't really do it"?

Wow. Talk about derangement syndrome, but it has nothing to do with President Obama.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

110. LMAO @ who REALLY bought the bullshit. Your desperation is showing.

[LondonReign2]

114. Kick & Bellylaugh

[BlueCheese]

115. At the moment it appears that France did initially block Morales from flying into its airspace.

However, it'd be nice to avoid jumping on the OP personally. I know it's not really my place to tell anyone else what to do, and there have been a lot of verbal slings and arrows in every direction of late, so some response might be justifiable, but I hope we can have some more peace on DU.

Just my opinion, for what it's worth-- not directed at anybody in particular. Thanks.

[Arctic Dave]

116. Kick douchebag post.

You have won the internet loozer of the day award.

[1-Old-Man]

117. BBC is reporting that the French have issued an appology for blocking his flight

So it would appear that either you or the BBC is mistaken.

[Marr]

121. Apologists...? This is why people don't listen to you anymore.

Like the Bushies of a few years ago, you have repeatedly shown yourselves to be shameless spreaders of bullshit. You can only be proven wrong so many times (particularly when you push lies with such aggressive vitriol) before people just sort of tune you out.

I mean, look at this thread. It starts out with the usual boosters crowing about being proven right, and mocking critics for not stepping up to admit they were wrong publicly. But when their claims are proven to be bullshit, they just disappear, or refuse to acknowledge it-- in exactly they manner they were criticizing others for just moments earlier.

[TheMadMonk]

122. The story that Snowden was on that plane was bullshit FIRST.

If that story had not been spread in the first place, THIS story would never have existed.

And whether or not a formal refusal was issued, unless an emergency situation exists, any pilot who flies into a country's airspace without explicit permission is going to find himself neck deep in it and sinking fast. And that only if those new friends approaching at Mach speed, don't introduce him and plane to the ground in pieces.

[stillwaiting]

124. Your desire to throw around ODS here is embarrassing. What a laughable OP. nt

[The Link]

125. Rec. The French apology for refusing use of airspace is a hoax!

ODS! ODS!

[graham4anything]

126. +2

[Bradical79]

128. -2 BBC and President Hollonade trump Yahoo "News" I think.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-23174874

[Hissyspit]

133. Um...

?

[fredamae]

127. Kinda hard to sort

truth from Corp MSM fiction these days....Here is another article I was just getting ready to post in another thread...Dear Lord--the "He said-She said" bs is getting a bit old...
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42219_France_Spain_and_Portugal-_We_Didnt_Deny_Landing_Rights_to_Morales_Plane

[Scurrilous]

134. K & R