Forcing down Evo Morales's plane was an act of air piracy

[Octafish]

Denying the Bolivian president air space was a metaphor for the gangsterism that now rules the world

by John Pilger
The Guardian, Thursday 4 July 2013 14.00 EDT

EXCERPT...

The forcing down of Bolivian President Evo Morales's plane – denied airspace by France, Spain and Portugal, followed by his 14-hour confinement while Austrian officials demanded to "inspect" his aircraft for the "fugitive" Edward Snowden – was an act of air piracy and state terrorism. It was a metaphor for the gangsterism that now rules the world and the cowardice and hypocrisy of bystanders who dare not speak its name.

In Moscow, Morales had been asked about Snowden – who remains trapped in the city's airport. "If there were a request [for political asylum]," he said, "of course, we would be willing to debate and consider the idea." That was clearly enough provocation for the Godfather. "We have been in touch with a range of countries that had a chance of having Snowden land or travel through their country," said a US state department official.

The French – having squealed about Washington spying on their every move, as revealed by Snowden – were first off the mark, followed by the Portuguese. The Spanish then did their bit by enforcing a flight ban of their airspace, giving the Godfather's Viennese hirelings enough time to find out if Snowden was indeed invoking article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."

Those paid to keep the record straight have played their part with a cat-and-mouse media game that reinforces the Godfather's lie that this heroic young man is running from a system of justice, rather than preordained, vindictive incarceration that amounts to torture – ask Bradley Manning and the living ghosts in Guantánamo.

CONTINUED...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/04/forcing-down-morales-plane-air-piracy

[Cooley Hurd]

1. Happy to be the 1st rec, of!

[Octafish]

15. Pilger brought up Harold Pinter...

For those unfamiliar with the name, the guy won the Nobel prize for Literature in 2005 and delivered a public address for the Ages.

Art, Truth & Politics

EXCERPT...

The invasion of Iraq was a bandit act, an act of blatant state terrorism, demonstrating absolute contempt for the concept of international law. The invasion was an arbitrary military action inspired by a series of lies upon lies and gross manipulation of the media and therefore of the public; an act intended to consolidate American military and economic control of the Middle East masquerading - as a last resort - all other justifications having failed to justify themselves - as liberation. A formidable assertion of military force responsible for the death and mutilation of thousands and thousands of innocent people.

We have brought torture, cluster bombs, depleted uranium, innumerable acts of random murder, misery, degradation and death to the Iraqi people and call it 'bringing freedom and democracy to the Middle East'.

How many people do you have to kill before you qualify to be described as a mass murderer and a war criminal? One hundred thousand? More than enough, I would have thought. Therefore it is just that Bush and Blair be arraigned before the International Criminal Court of Justice. But Bush has been clever. He has not ratified the International Criminal Court of Justice. Therefore if any American soldier or for that matter politician finds himself in the dock Bush has warned that he will send in the marines. But Tony Blair has ratified the Court and is therefore available for prosecution. We can let the Court have his address if they're interested. It is Number 10, Downing Street, London.

Death in this context is irrelevant. Both Bush and Blair place death well away on the back burner. At least 100,000 Iraqis were killed by American bombs and missiles before the Iraq insurgency began. These people are of no moment. Their deaths don't exist. They are blank. They are not even recorded as being dead. 'We don't do body counts,' said the American general Tommy Franks.

SNIP...

The 2,000 American dead are an embarrassment. They are transported to their graves in the dark. Funerals are unobtrusive, out of harm's way. The mutilated rot in their beds, some for the rest of their lives. So the dead and the mutilated both rot, in different kinds of graves.

CONTINUED...

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/2005/pinter-lecture-e.html

Harold Pinter's gone now, another Buddha we can only hear through his words. Thankfully, we still have John Pilger.

Thanks for grokking, Cooley Hurd! Our world would be a far better place were we to base our policies and actions on his principal ideal: Truth.

[sabrina 1]

99. Pilger is one of the most informed investigative journalists in the news business today.

He was writing about Bush's drones back before anyone even knew they existed.

He is correct as always, and it's either going to have to be resolved, or every diplomat in the world can be treated this way.

[Marrah_G]

2. In my opinion what our country did is wrong.

Our President should be calling his peer and apologizing for our country's over-stepping in this matter. In fact every head of state from every country involved should be calling Morales to apologize.

[snappyturtle]

11. +1 nt

[Octafish]

29. +2

But that would involve an admission of being in the wrong. While that's something democracies do, that is something empires never do.

Looking at it strategically -- from the DOD/DOS perspective -- the treatment of Morales over the possibility Snowden was aboard the presidential aircraft has worked to move 2/3 of the world closer to China and Russia. Maybe that's the point, but it's not a smart move if one wants peace.

[leftstreet]

39. +3

[Enthusiast]

72. +4

It was an act of extreme ugliness and more.

[ReRe]

78. +5

[woo me with science]

93. +6

[leftstreet]

3. Western imperialists have pirated the globe's resources

So what's a little plane?

DURec

[Octafish]

32. What Steve Kangas wrote...

"To the people who work for it, the CIA is known as The Company. The Big Business mentality pervades everything. Agents, for instance, are called assets. The man in charge of the United Kingdom desk is said to have the 'U.K. account'..." -- Philip Agee

The Origins of the Overclass

by Steve Kangas

EXCERPT...

The Business Origins of CIA Crimes

Although many people think that the CIA’s primary mission during the Cold War was to "deter communism," Noam Chomksy correctly points out that its real mission was "deterring democracy." From corrupting elections to overthrowing democratic governments, from assassinating elected leaders to installing murderous dictators, the CIA has virtually always replaced democracy with dictatorship. It didn’t help that the CIA was run by businessmen, whose hostility towards democracy is legendary. The reason they overthrew so many democracies is because the people usually voted for policies that multi-national corporations didn't like: land reform, strong labor unions, nationalization of their industries, and greater regulation protecting workers, consumers and the environment.

So the CIA’s greatest "successes" were usually more pro-corporate than anti-communist. Citing a communist threat, the CIA helped overthrow the democratically elected Mohammed Mussadegh government in Iran in 1953. But there was no communist threat — the Soviets stood back and watched the coup from afar. What really happened was that Mussadegh threatened to nationalize British and American oil companies in Iran. Consequently, the CIA and MI6 toppled Mussadegh and replaced him with a puppet government, headed by the Shah of Iran and his murderous secret police, SAVAK. The reason why the Ayatollah Khomeini and his revolutionaries took 52 Americans hostage in Tehran in 1979 was because the CIA had helped SAVAK torture and murder their people.

Another "success" was the CIA’s overthrow of the democratically elected government of Jacabo Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954. Again, there was no communist threat. The real threat was to Guatemala’s United Fruit Company, a Rockefeller-owned firm whose stockholders included CIA Director Allen Dulles. Arbenz threatened to nationalize the company, albeit with generous compensation. In response, the CIA initiated a coup that overthrew Arbenz and installed the murderous dictator Castillo Armas. For four decades, CIA-backed dicatators would torture and murder hundreds of thousands of leftists, union members and others who would fight for a more equitable distribution of the country’s resources.

Another "success" story was Chile. In 1973, the country’s democratically elected leader, Salvadore Allende, nationalized foreign-owned interests, like Chile’s lucrative copper mines and telephone system. International Telephone & Telegraph (ITT) offered the CIA $1 million to overthrow Allende — which the CIA allegedly refused — but paid $350,000 to his political opponents. The CIA responded with a coup that murdered Allende and replaced him with a brutal tyrant, General Augusto Pinochet. Pinochet tortured and murdered thousands of leftists, union members and political opponents as economists trained at the University of Chicago under Milton Friedman installed a "free market" economy. Since then, income inequality has soared higher in Chile than anywhere else in Latin America.

Even when the communist threat was real, the CIA first and foremost took care of the elite. In testimony before Congress in the early 50s, it artificially inflated Soviet military capabilities. A notorious example was the "bomber gap" that later turned out to be grossly exaggerated. Another was "Team B," a group of hawkish CIA analysts who seriously distorted Soviet military data. These scare tactics worked. Congress awarded giant defense contracts to the U.S. military-industrial complex.

CONTINUED...

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-overclass.html

Next we'll be hearing that if were really evil, we'd have shot it down like the Soviets and the jetliner. It's what "Mescans" deserve.

[Ichingcarpenter]

4. John Kerry thinks he's John Bolton

very poorly handled.

[Octafish]

37. The decision to close air space to a diplomatic flight could only've come from Kerry's boss.

While I thought he was supposed to be the smartest guy in the room, seeing that the banksters walk free and their corrupt institutions remain open for business made me long ago rethink that evaluation.

[Ichingcarpenter]

41. Kerry been on his yacht h

for the last three days btw.

I'm just being kind not describing the obvious on who really is in charge.

But this episode does seem like John Bolton would have approved.

[malaise]

51. +1,000

What a mess

[treestar]

5. Amazing

How many exaggerated terms will be used? It took a while to get there.

Kidnapping
Hijacking
Air Piracy

What's next?

And who dunnit? Odd that such defenders of the Constitution require no evidence at all in order to convict someone of a criminal act (or what they see as one)

[Cooley Hurd]

7. How many events will take place before you realize what happened was WRONG?

[treestar]

12. What happened?

what is the evidence?

Why are you willing to convict someone of "air piracy" without evidence?

[MrMickeysMom]

124. What do YOU think happened, treestar?

Was it just a little inconvenience to force down his plane? What would we call a similar action towards Air Force One?

[treestar]

133. I don't know what happened

But I doubt it was "air piracy."

And I would not convict anyone of "air piracy" without evidence of the elements of that crime.

The President re-fueled and was safely in Bolivia within a reasonable amount of time. They had to refuel somewhere. They failed to work it out with Portugal and then assumed and found they had to make other arrangements.

I doubt this would happen to AF 1 as they would make all proper arrangements. If it had to land somewhere unplanned and the President ended up safe at his destination with a few hours delay - I don't think I'd consider the end of the world.

In fact, would you be all outraged on the President's behalf if it were AF 1? Or would you say he deserved it for being the American President?

[MrMickeysMom]

139. Wow... what an avoided answer, treestar...

I at least expected an honest answer - not, "I don't know what happened BUT I DOUBT IT WAS "AIR PIRACY". If you don't know what happened, then why do you doubt that act was anything near it when diverting another country's presidential flight plan?

Maybe it's revealed in your other response - what if this were to happen to Air Force One?... (gulp) you respond, "I doubt this would happen to AF 1 as they would make all proper arrangements." Really? Cause we would always do the right thing, is it?

So, you can't see the reciprocal happening to the United States of America... cause... why again? Who in the world stage have we become with this act of aggression? We don't even apologize, either.

Finally, you spin out full throttle with - "..would you be all outraged on the President's behalf if it were AF? Or would you say he deserved it for being the American President?" Now, who is saying diverting the President of Bolivia's plane is any worse than the President of the United States? It's a wrongful act, in fact and that was the point!

[treestar]

140. Why didn't you answer my question?

I answered all of yours. Your post is a falsehood.

You wouldn't mind it happening to AF 1 at all and would cheer it on.

Why do I have to know what happened? No one does. But "air piracy" is a clear exaggeration, right up there with kidnapping and hijacking. Nobody hijacked that plane. Nobody kidnapped Evo. There was no "air piracy."

[MrMickeysMom]

141. Please don't disgrace the post by indicating you answered me...

You did anything BUT answer. Frankly, I don't suffer fools very well, especially on this subject.

You must have a good reason in your inability to respond or to stay on the subject.

That's about enough, as it's fruitless to think you'd look at a reverse circumstance. You don't want to and that's the end of it.

[okaawhatever]

49. I don't know, when will someone from your side address important questions such as:

Why would an aircraft taking off for a 3000 nm trip, be low on fuel after a 900nm flight? Even denied airspace (if that happened the way Morales claimed) would still have left him with more than enough fuel. Why was the fuel gauge not inspected and repaired? Did the host country not have the authority to inspect an airplane for crew? The crew manifest is checked in many instances. Why is it such a bad thing here? How about passports? Is Austria not allowed to check passports?

[Octafish]

40. Guess another term that's missing is ''Fascism.''

Going by history: Democracies don't abrogate treaties when convenient. Authoritarian and fascist regimes do.

[A Simple Game]

64. Perhaps you could educate us as to what the event should be called.

Or are you more comfortable denying the event ever took place?

[ProSense]

6. Silliness. The plane wasn't "forced" down

and "piracy"?

Absurd.

The hyperbole is getting thick.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023163029

[Cooley Hurd]

9. Linking to your own threads is...

...sad.

[HooptieWagon]

17. Narcissism is as narcissism does.

I guess she's feeling neglected....

[Cooley Hurd]

18. .

[ProSense]

25. Why on

"Narcissism is as narcissism does. I guess she's feeling neglected...."

...earth would I feel "neglected" with so many people swarming my comments?

[HooptieWagon]

28. Do you think the comment was referring to you?

[ProSense]

30. Yes, but now you're going to pretend it didn't

because I mentioned swarming.

Of course, I could be wrong and you replied to someone who addressed me by making a totally unrelated comment. Yeah, that's believable.

[HooptieWagon]

33. No one was called out, it was an open-ended comment.

But if you feel it was directed at you personally, then perhaps you should examine why you feel that.

[ProSense]

34. OK

"No one was called out, it was an open-ended comment."

....sure: "I guess she's feeling neglected.... "

"open-ended" (wink-wink)

[bvar22]

94. I don't believe you are really rolling on the floor,

or laughing.



Nobody else does either,
but Please Proceed.

Bvar's Postulate:

The first person to use in a discussion thread or sub-thread is not really laughing,
but has, in effect, made a public admission that they are no longer able to cogently defend their position,
and are desperately clinging to the absurd notion that no one at DU will be clever enough to see through their pathetic attempt to Save Face.

[ProSense]

23. Comments about "linking"

are pathetic.

Oh well.

[Cooley Hurd]

24. Tis what it Tis...

[SaveOurDemocracy]

70. Repeatedly spamming a board with one's own blue links, to the point...

that it's become a joke, is beyond pitiful

[Octafish]

36. I know, I know. I do it too much.

For instance, why Manning and Assange and Snowden are enemies of the state:

Know your BFEE: WikiLeaks Stratfor Dump Exposes Continued Secret Government Warmongering

For me, DU's like a lie-bury. Some are put to rest. Others are exposed.

[Cooley Hurd]

108. But I've found your self-linking to be supportive of your OP...

...not an attempt to create an echo chamber.

[Octafish]

43. A diplomatic flight is prevented from re-fueling when scheduled and searched upon landing.

What hyperbole?

[SidDithers]

46. DU runs on hyperbole...

Don't you know, Snowden is Paul Revere and Morales is Harriet Tubman.



Sid

[backwoodsbob]

57. and the President is

FDR,lincoln,and Washington all wrapped up in one

[Enthusiast]

73. You forgot Reagan, his favorite........nt

[zappaman]

8. !

[HangOnKids]

14. You Have A Problem With John Pilger?

Really? Got some published works zappaman?

Edit for mistake!

[zappaman]

16. "nugentman"?

???

[HangOnKids]

19. Oh shit sorry I thought your handle was nugentman

I see now it is zappaman, confused the 2.

[zappaman]

22. No worries.

They're spelled very similar, so I can see the mistake.

[Number23]

106. lol!!!

You are hilarious!

[SidDithers]

48. I can see how that typo might happen, Binka...

oh, I mean HangOnKids.

Shit sorry, thought your handle was Binka. Apologies for the confusion.

Sid

[Octafish]

52. Anything to add, zappaman?

Besides an emoticon, I don't recall much of anything from your replies.

[zappaman]

54. I think laughter is the appropriate response to this hyperbole.

So, I'm good with the last response.

[Octafish]

59. Then you've missed the point.

TBSS.

[randome]

10. Let me get this straight.

All these countries that you imply are the puppets of America would not have searched Morales' plane themselves. He originally intended to land in Portugal for refueling, right? But now the Guardian says they were part of the 'plot', too.

For some reason, Austria had to be involved?

I don't get it.

[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]

[Cooley Hurd]

13. US Aid (i.e. $$$) is quite the carrot...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man

[randome]

20. But why not let him land in Portugal as intended?

I'm sure they are as beholden to America as anyone else. And if not, why would they turn Morales' plane away from its refueling stop?

It just doesn't make sense to play 'musical airspace', which makes me think it truly was a colossal misunderstanding all around, starting with the rumor that Snowden was aboard.

Considering what S&G have released so far, it hardly seems likely anyone would go to such lengths to catch him. It seems like everyone is more inclined to let him remain in limbo in a Russian airport.

[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]

[morningfog]

27. Portugal wouldn't let him land. Spain would have, but France wouldn't let him fly through.

A call was mad to the countries involved that Snowden was on the plane. The countries knew that if the plane landed and Snowden jumped out, they would have to deal with him, either consider his asylum request or extradite him to the US. They didn't want to do that.

[randome]

45. But if they were doing this because we were pulling the strings...

...then why refuse them permission to land? I still don't get it. Or do you mean they just didn't want the hassle? Which means we weren't pulling their strings.

[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]

[Major Nikon]

65. France has said they did allow permission to their airspace

They said they initiall refused, then approved. Spain has flatly denied permission was ever refused to their airspace.

After initial hedging from France, Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius issued a statement Wednesday night acknowledging that Morales' plane was initially refused and saying he called his Bolivian counterpart to apologize. The statement didn't explain why.
Fabius "expressed France's regrets following the temporary problems that occurred for President Morales because of delays in confirming authorization to fly over (French) territory."
"There was naturally never any intention to refuse access to our airspace to President Morales, who is always welcome in our country," Fabius said.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=198257536

[Downwinder]

31. Interesting that Austria is the only non NATO country involved.

[randome]

53. You'd think we'd have more pull with the other countries but they didn't want to get involved?

It's hard for me to see a conspiracy here.

[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]

[Downwinder]

56. More like an opportunity for denial.

Rustlers used to use someone else's corral. Come to think of it the plane was sort of herded into Vienna.

[rusty fender]

89. Still denying that it happend?

You should be apologizing at this point at how wrong you were.

[dawg]

21. It was a violation of international law and a display of ...

colossal arrogance and disrespect of a head of state. I wouldn't call it piracy, though.

[zappaman]

26. Of course you wouldn't call it piracy.

Cuz it isn't.

[dawg]

35. So stop saying that!

[Rex]

66. I agree, not piracy.

It was a total display of arrogance.

[Hydra]

38. lol'ing at the people pretending this isn't a big deal

If they forced Air Force 1 to land in Bolivia and pulled one of our CIA guys out for espionage charges, there'd be no end of the screaming.

Since it's some South American head of state, it's supposedly ok.

[cstanleytech]

44. Ok Hydra and others, what is the truth here? I have read conflicting accounts on what happened so

would someone please clear it up?
One account states the countries turned them away from their airspace? (shitty thing to do but legal I thought as its their airspace afterall)
Another one says the pilot was asked if there was a problem and the pilot said something along the lines of they were having issues with their gauges over the fuel or something.
So which is the truth?

[Hydra]

75. There's a writeup thread in greatest

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023171264

Sorry, something came up and had to wander away for a bit.

In a nutshell, a "mysterious" someone told all the players in this that Snowden was on board the plane. This has been admitted to by basically all sources today. Everyone is pretending we don't know who this someone is. These countries basically blockaded the Bolivian President's plane, either by denying airspace or ability to land for fuel to cross the Atlantic with. They were forced to double back to Vienna to get refueled. In Vienna, they were pressured to allow a search of the plane by various people. Morales refused, and after 13 hours they gave up and let him go.

So far we can assume Snowden wasn't aboard...but we can't really be sure.

There is an alternate theory that they needed to make a repair, but I checked the flight record, and they were 3/4 of the way through Austria before they turned around and backtracked to Vienna. You'd think they'd want to park somewhere closer?

Anyway, there were suggestions that this was all a big misunderstanding, but a lot of high level people are apologizing to Morales about it, saying they were trying to catch Snowden. IMO: Huge Imperial diplo blunder.

[cstanleytech]

84. See the main problem I am having is this link

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/global/2013/07/tale-re-routed-bolivian-presidents-plane-falling-apart/66838/

Especially the part down near the bottom

"Control tower: Do you need any assistance?

Pilot: Not at this moment. We need to land because we cannot get a correct indication of the fuel indication so as a precaution we need to land."

[Hydra]

95. I'll look at it when I get a minute

But I've been following the thread from who was doing what from the outside rather than what the Bolivians were doing. And today all the various gov'ts are talking about how concerned they were about Snowden being aboard the plane.

Supposedly for the line of thinking that this was just a mechanical problem, nobody was actually looking for Snowden. Since everyone is now copping to wanting Snowden and nobody is denying that Morales was not allowed to leave for 13 hours, not sure how it would relate to the debate anymore.

[Hydra]

102. Ok, I read the link

And it was the story that originally was cited to say that all of this is in dispute. The clarifications posted all seem to point at it all going back to Snowden, and the EU gov't statements all point to information they were given that Snowden was definitely on the plane.

Not sure about the fuel indicator, but they were planning on refuelling before crossing the Atlantic, they would have had that repaired at the planned refuel point. But then they suddenly don't have permission to fly over France and things get all pear shaped, especially with Spain requiring assurances that Snowden is not aboard before they will be allowed to land.

It seems pretty clear based on the admissions that they wanted Snowden...bad. He's now been granted asylum in 2 countries, and that may expand to all of the South American coalition based on this overreach.

[cstanleytech]

103. Ok thanks for the clarification.

I am not convinced that its an issue that those countries want Snowden rather France and the others just dont want the headache of dealing with him coming into their borders even if its just on a plane for refueling.
After all look at the headache he caused for Putin who offered to let him stay providing he shut up.

[Hydra]

104. Oh, I know France and the others don't want Snowden

An additional element to this is the creepy press conference that the WH had on the subject. I can't find it at the moment, but they basically said: "I don't think there's anyone who doesn't know we want Snowden..." hinting that they have talked to basically everyone on the subject and want him brought to them by any means.

Others have said this was a bit of a gamble, but they probably felt like if they could get Snowden, they could downplay Morales' outrage by saying that he was smuggling a felon. Their bad luck that he wasn't aboard.

[okaawhatever]

55. No one FORCED the aircraft to land. Their claim that they had fuel gauge problems is suspect.

Was it repaired? They claimed they were low on fuel, but should have had enough fuel for a 3000nm trip when Austria is only 900nm from Moscow, certainly fuel couldn't have been an issue. The technical details of Morales' claim don't add up. This story is hyperbole at it's finest. If they were forced to land, it was due to the event they claimed (fuel gauge issues) or Morales is lying. There is only one reason for his attempting to land anywhere except the Canaries, fuel gauge problems. PERIOD.

[Octafish]

60. The aircraft had filed a flight plan, including authorization for re-fueling in Spain.

Which doesn't matter, as it's a diplomatic flight and has many protections under international treaties to which the United States is signatory -- which is the point.

[okaawhatever]

62. I beg to differ. The authorization of the flight plan was for the Canary Islands. There may be a

question of wording, as in "Spain gave us permission to refuel" technically correct. Spain gave authorization to refuel in the Canaries. Spain denied refueling stop, as in "Spain denied request to refuel on the mainland."

Interviewed on Friday by Television Española (TVE), García-Margallo said that Mariano Rajoy's conservative administration does not have to ask apology to Bolivian President for the diversion incident and the subsequent retention of the presidential plane.

"It is clear that Spain does not need to excuse its behavior, the airspace was never closed," claimed the minister of Foreign Affairs.
According to Garcia-Margallo, Madrid allowed the landing of the plane in the Canary Islands, because Bolivia gave its word that Snowden was not on board.

"I believe in the word of friendly countries and Bolivian government's word was enough to believe that Snowden was not on board," noted Garcia-Margallo in his statements to TVE

http://www.plenglish.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1581891&Itemid=1

[Major Nikon]

67. That's clearly not what happened here

As far as your hypothetical situation goes, I would have no problem with it. If you fly over the airspace of another country, you must abide by their rules.

[SylviaD]

42. Freedom from persecution not freedom from prosecution. Important difference. n/t

[Maedhros]

47. The fact that people are denying that anything wrong happened

is disconcerting.

It cannot be denied, in good faith, that diplomatic protocol was violated.

[Octafish]

68. As the 'center' keeps moving ever rightward...

...what formerly was fascistic, imperial behavior becomes ever more sensible and acceptable.

It's Friendly Fascism.

[Maedhros]

111. Don't use the "F" word to describe what the NSA is doing.

"Friendly", indeed.

[Major Nikon]

69. It's pretty clear by now that Bolivia was pretty disengenuous regarding their account

Either that or several other countries are lying about it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/07/03/evo-morales-controversial-flight-over-europe-minute-by-heavily-disputed-minute/

Trying to make a call either way seems premature, given there's quite a bit that needs to be reconcilled regarding what actually happened.

[Maedhros]

105. I wouldn't say Bolivia has been any more disingenuous that France or Spain or Austria...

It's an international incident - everyone is jockeying for position and looking for plausible deniability.

These kind of events, with multiple narratives from multiple sources, are always a bit difficult to piece together at first. All of the reports are contradictory on some points, but it's not really fair to single out Bolivia as disingenuous.

[Major Nikon]

107. As I said, it's either one or the other

If you believe Bolivia's account, you have to believe that more than one other country is lying.

[SidDithers]

50. Damn you BFEE!!!...nt

Sid

[Octafish]

58. Why you find fun in the BFEE is your own affair, SidDithers.

Bartcop coined the term "Bush Family Evil Empire" to denote the 60-year pre-eminence of one family in the formation of the political philosophy in the United States, that of the War Party. And, yes, personally, I have tried to chronicle their influence on the ascension of the national security state. At least three generations have held high national office, while also making big money off war and looting the public Treasury. The last president of the United States, a man who wasn't elected fair and square by any stretch of the imagination, actually said: "Money trumps peace" at a press conference. For some reason, not a single "journalist" had the guts to ask him what he meant by that.

Why that doesn't bother you is your business. It does bother me.

PS: Something I've notice about you is that you never seem to post anything that adds to what we know about these treasonous warmongers. I do remember that you do like to post emoticons, sorry to say.

[greytdemocrat]

61. OMG Sid!!!

He's got you!!!!

[xiamiam]

63. silence from the white house is bs.. I cant believe it

I'm not expecting much. I'm expecting a lie but I am expecting something and the longer it takes, the worse this is

[Octafish]

71. The thing exposes incompetence, all around.

From OK-ing a plan to go after Morales' official aircraft, to the planning of the operation, to the public relations massacre afterward, it has been one huge mess up.

What McClatchy's reporting:

Denial of European airspace for Bolivian president’s flight causes turbulence

By Matthew Schofield | McClatchy Foreign Staff

BERLIN — The assertion by Bolivia’s president that his plane was denied rights to fly across four European nations because of suspicions that fugitive National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden might be on board set off a bitter diplomatic battle Wednesday that did little to illuminate what actually had happened.

France and Spain said Bolivian President Evo Morales was always welcome in their airspace on his way home from Moscow, where he’d attended a conference. But the Bolivians said the two nations and others had denied their leader access to their airspace, despite being in a jet that was dangerously low on fuel, and they accused the nations of acting on U.S. suspicions that Snowden, who’s been hiding out in the transit area of Moscow’s airport, had somehow been sneaked aboard Morales’ plane.

The Associated Press later reported that French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius had released a statement Wednesday night acknowledging that Morales’ plane was initially refused and saying he’d called Morales to apologize. The statement gave no reason for the denial.

Bolivians said the presidential plane had to reroute shortly before entering Italian airspace and head for Vienna to refuel. There, Morales spent 14 hours waiting to continue his journey home. Bolivian Vice President Alvaro Garcia called the matter “imperial kidnapping.”

CONTINUED...

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/07/03/195752/denial-of-european-airspace-for.html#.Udc__Tsp92A

The hypocrisy of our Allies also is most telling to anyone of a non-racialist nature.

[markiv]

74. Equally disturbing is the media's dismissal of the issue

during the cold war, intercepting a head of state returning from moscow could have easily been accepted as an act of war

Obama's action here, and Bush's invasion of Iraq would have been WWIII starters

[markiv]

80. this incident is profoundly more important than the travon martin trial

which CBS is leading off with on the news right now

whatever one wants to make of the travon martin/zimmerman case, bottom line is it's a mall cop wannabe thinking a gun made him a 'big man'. a tragedy, but it's not nearly as important as this story that they 'dont have time for'

[Octafish]

88. It is most troubling.

Even with all the psyops post-9/11, to see the growing acceptance of fascism among my countrymen is the most disheartening development of recent years.

Bush and Cheney lied America into invading an innocent nation. Even if they didn't steal a drop of oil, the war shock sent petroleum prices through the roof, vastly enriching their circle of disaster capitalists. The same reaction got Smirko rich, back in the HARKEN Energy days:

A Wolf in Sheikhs Clothing:

Bush Business Deals with 9 Partners of bin Laden’s Banker

by Martin J. Rivers

EXCERPT...

Bush’s Bahrain Oil Deal: "I Beseach Thee, Oh Godfather"

The younger Bush's insider trading allegations relating to Harken lead a trail to the reportedly lucrative and exclusive offshore oil drilling contract that Harken received from the government of Bahrain in 1990, despite having had no previous international or off-shore drilling experience.

Bush sold his shares in Harken in 1991, immediately after the wells were found to be dry and just before the first Persian Gulf War, using his artificially inflated profits from the stock sale to buy into the Texas Rangers baseball team, making him personally wealthy enough to sell out before going into politics. George W. Bush's Bahrain deal was arranged by Houston oil consultant, Michael Ameen.

At that time, Ameen was a paid consultant for the U.S. State Department and had briefed the incoming U.S. ambassador to Bahrain, Charles Hostler. Simultaneously, Ameen was also the head of government relations for the Saudi's Arabian American Oil Company (ARAMCO) that had Mahfouz on its Supreme Council. In that position, Ameen spent years dealing with members of the Saudi royal family and their associates, including his close friend Sheikh Kamal Adham, the long-term and influencial director of Saudi Intelligence from 1963 until 1979, overlapping former President Bush's tenure as CIA director. Sheikh Adham was formally involved in the Bahrain deal.

As an example of well-connected men, for over 25 years, the U.S. State Department’s deal maker, Michael Ameen, has known Harken-investor Sheikh Bakhsh, who at various times was also a principle shareholder in Stephens’ Worthen Bank, in BCCI and in Mahfouz’s Middle East Capital Group. As an example of a close and tight network, by Michael Ameen’s own account, within 10 minutes of discussing the matter of his recommendation of Harken for Bahrain's offshore deal with their Oil Minister, he received a call from one of Harken's investment bankers at Stephens Inc. of Little Rock. Before long, Ameen was leading Harken delegations to Bahrain, earning $100,000 for his services.

Earlier, during the 1980’s, Sheikh Adham and his successor as Saudi Intelligence Director, Abdul Khalil, secretly acted as BCCI nominees in a hostile take-over of Washington D.C.’s largest bank, Financial General Bankshares, that soon became First American Bankshares. First American was, in fact, a Bank of Credit and Commerce International front for Mahfouz that was set up in the U.S. with the pivotal assistance of billionaire Jackson Stephens, a lavish financial backer of many political campaigns for both Bush presidents.

Another principle shareholder of 25 million dollars in First American was arms merchant, Mohammed Hammoud, a long-time friend and business associate of Bahrain's Ambassador Hostler. And according to the Kerry Committee report, five Iran-Contra related wire transfers were made out of North/Secord accounts at First American in the amount of $346,000.00.

Previously, the CIA's station chief in Saudi Arabia, Raymond Close, who had illegally and covertly transferred weapons from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan in the 1970s, went to work for Sheikh Kamal Adham, a BCCI director, upon leaving the agency. A principle way in which BCCI was used as a money laundering service by drug traffickers and arms dealers was through its commodities affiliate, Capcom, that had both Stephens’ associates at First American, Sheikhs Adham and Khalil, as directors and majority shareholders.

A central figure in the 1990 off-shore drilling contract with George W. Bush’s company, Harken, was the Prime Minister of Bahrain, Sheikh Khalifah, who was also a major investor in BCCI Holdings. Prime Minister Khalifa and his brother, the Emir, both signed off on Harken's Bahrain oil deal, along with Sheikh Adham, who was termed the “Godfather of Saudi Intelligence” in the Kerry Report.

CONTINUED...

http://whale.to/b/rivers.html

Thank you for speaking out, and standing up, against it, markiv!

[Rstrstx]

77. Why don't we wait for the whole story to come out before jumping to conclusions?

People seem to be buying the Bolivian's account of what went down without question. Perhaps an investigation is in order, one run by neutral parties, as to what actually happened. I've seen so many accounts of what went down and each story is probably cloaked in half-truths - at best. On the one hand I don't trust Morales farther than I can throw him. But as for the part of the US in the incident, well, the silence is deafening

[Octafish]

81. You can wait for the official version. The facts speak for themselves.

A diplomatic flight was forced to land where it was not planning to go so the aircraft could be searched for a whistle-blower.

[Tx4obama]

87. The FACT is that his plane was NOT forced to land. Please stop spreading misinformation.

There is AUDIO proof that the pilot REQUEST to land due to instrument problems.

Evo Morales' plane WAS NOT "forced" down. This is how a lie spreads.

Here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023178681

[woo me with science]

92. War is Peace.

Freedom is Slavery.
Ignorance is Strength.

[Octafish]

97. Ignorance is Strength.

A couple of facts that match what I understand:

The plane was running out of gas and it couldn't refuel where it was scheduled to.

Upon diversion to Austria, it was held 14 hours until searched.

[HooptieWagon]

82. France has apologized to Morales...

...and Austria has fingered the CIA as making the request to nab Snowden (who apparently wasn't aboard). So Morales version of events has been substantiated so far.

[Rstrstx]

91. When did Austria finger the CIA?

Do you mean this incident? An Austrian Green Party member has implicated the US, that's all I've seen.

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023174554#post7

[Catherina]

117. And it was the US Ambassador who made the call to the Foreign Ministry

Related thread: White House Dares EU Leaders to Rat On United States in Morales Flyover Affair

US Requested that Vienna Extradite Snowden

03.07.2013 | 21:28 | HELMAR DUMBS UND CHRISTIAN ULTSCH (Die Presse)

Bolivian President Morales was forced to land in Vienna. NSA whistleblower Snowden was suspected to be on his jet. In a telephone conversation with the Foreign Office, the U.S. ambassador demanded they extradite him.

...

Here's the crucial section:

Sie landete gegen 23 Uhr. Kurz danach ging im Wiener Außenamt ein dringlicher Anruf ein. Am anderen Ende der Leitung: US-Botschafter William Eacho. Wie "Die Presse" erfuhr, behauptete er mit großer Bestimmtheit, dass Edward Snowden an Bord sei, der von den USA gesuchte Aufdecker jüngster Abhörskandale. Eacho habe auf eine diplomatische Note verwiesen, in der die USA die Auslieferung Snowdens verlangten.

Translated:

It landed about 11 pm. Shortly after that, the Vienna foreign department received a phone call. The caller was the US ambassador William Echo. "Die Presse" learned that he claimed with strong firmness that Edward Snowden was onboard, the whistleblower of the recent surveillance scandals. Eacho referred to a diplomatic note requesting Snowden's extradition.


http://diepresse.com/home/politik/aussenpolitik/1426275/USA-verlangten-von-Wien-Snowdens-Auslieferung?_vl_backlink=/home/politik/aussenpolitik/1416110/index.do&direct=1416110

Thanks to Temmer for the translation

[Progressive dog]

79. Air Piracy lol

[Octafish]

83. What did Snowden do that would make the United States government act like a fascist power?

Any clue?

[Progressive dog]

86. Air Piracy and Fascist

They must be holding Morales in Guantanamo until he talks.

[Octafish]

96. Morales shouldn't be held or diverted anywhere. That's the point of international treaties.

Otherwise, it'd be like all those students in Tehran who took the American hostages and helped get Ronnie Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush into office.

http://consortiumnews.com/the-new-october-surprise-series/

[Progressive dog]

112. Assuming a treaty was violated (one wasn't),

it still was not air piracy and it sure wasn't fascism.

[Octafish]

113. Hey! You got that right. But you'd be wrong.

In its desperate effort to capture Snowden, it is trashing the Vienna Convention of 1961 and a tradition of diplomatic immunity for heads of state that is of much more ancient origin. -- Dave Lindorff in CounterPunch

Me, I'll believe what I want. And I know what I know, including some stuff they don't air on the television. For instance:

Poppy’s CIA warned about terror plots and did not stop them

[Progressive dog]

114. Air piracy and fascism is now violating a tradition

of diplomatic immunity. I'm glad you cleared that up. What did they arrest Morales for or do you mean his airplane had diplomatic immunity?

[Octafish]

115. Morales as a head of state doesn't have to pull his aircraft over for anybody.

It's like the diplomatic plates of the sky. Democracies respect that.

[Progressive dog]

116. Air piracy and fascism is now a traffic stop

If he didn't have to "pull his aircraft over", then there should be no fake outrage that he did.

[Octafish]

119. No. The traffic stop is an easy to understand allegory.

Morales was shown the contempt reserved for criminal suspects, not a head of state. You can write all you want about this and that being or not being fascism. It doesn't matter, nor does it change the facts, history or international law.

If you're not familiar with the term, an allegory is like a story filled with symbols to represent important concepts. Similar to African Americans profiled by racist cops and pulled over while "driving Black," Morales got the mistreatment for flying while Brown.

[Progressive dog]

120. I'm glad you understand how traffic stop is an allegory for air piracy,

fascism, and now racism. I thought it was just gobbledegook. Actually I still think so.

[Octafish]

122. So, you do understand. The obtuse act was rhetorical.

It's not gobbledegook - that's where we differ. From your posts, it seems clear you're OK with the actions of empire. I prefer a nation based on democratic principles.

I'd say "no biggie," but it is.

[Progressive dog]

123. Fascism and air piracy indicates being okay with dishonestly

making ridiculous accusations against the democratic governments of France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, and the United States.
I don't equate that with supporting democracy, I don't think most rational people would.

[Octafish]

126. With the exception of France, those nations all were onboard the CIA Torture Train.

The full 54 countries that aided in post-9/11 renditions: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Egypt, Ethiopia, Finland, Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Iceland, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, Libya, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mauritania, Morocco, Pakistan, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Syria, Thailand, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan, Yemen, and Zimbabwe. The Open Society Foundation doesn’t rule out additional ones being involved that it has yet to discover.

SOURCE: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/02/54-countries-rendition/

FYI: Like fascism and air piracy, I don't find torture democratic.

[Progressive dog]

127. Fascism and piracy, now torture trains

all because one SA president's plane was delayed. Quite a stretch.
A long way from there to fascism, but you can make the leap.

[Octafish]

129. It's too bad you don't see the connection.

They are un-democratic.

[Progressive dog]

130. So the US is not a democracy because Snowden and

Bolivia is because Morales. and air piracy and fascism and torture trains are because ????

[Octafish]

131. Not quite. In the USA, money trumps elections.

The candidate with the most money almost always wins. Citizens United makes it even more un-democratic.

BTW: The Carter Center reported Bolivia held a free and democratic election in 2009.

http://www.cartercenter.org/news/publications/election_reports.html

[Progressive dog]

132. Got it, money buys air piracy , torture trains, and fascism

because undemocratic.
BTW Bolivia held elections in 2009 and put in place a new constitution. A history of four whole years of elected constitutional government.

[Octafish]

134. Precisely. And exactly why Morales should be respected.

The governments of Bolivia have largely been rightwing military dictatorships answering to the landed European gentry who make up the nation's sociopolitical elite. Before reforms enacted in 1953 following a populist revolt, indigenous Bolivians couldn't legally use a side walk.

[Progressive dog]

135. This gets funnier by the minute

No matter how outrageous I try to make your words sound, you are ahead of me in the outrageous department.

Before reforms enacted in 1953 following a populist revolt, indigenous Bolivians couldn't legally use a side walk.

I guess that is reason enough to respect the Bolivian government, they let everybody use Bolivian sidewalks now.

[Octafish]

137. There is nothing funny about fascism.

Here's a good article on its impact for Bolivia and the US for those new to the history:

http://m.spiegel.de/international/germany/a-740393.html#spRedirectedFrom=www&referrrer=http://www.google.com/search?ei=tN_ZUevzJe2DyAH19oHwAQ&q=bolivia+klaus+barbie&oq=Bolivia+klaus+barbie&gs_l=mobile-gws-serp.1.0.0i22i30j0i8.251357.264099.0.277298.11.8.0.1.1.0.395.1541.0j4j1j2.7.0....0...1c.1.19.mobile-gws-serp.dBzQdz7PRY4

BTW: There's also nothing funny about bigotry, cultural or otherwise.

[Progressive dog]

142. I'm not talking about humor in fascism.

BTW There is no such thing as cultural bigotry. If your culture condones human sacrifice, then if I am opposed to your culture, I am not a bigot. If your culture subordinates women or if your culture specifies religion, then your culture stinks and saying so doesn't make me a bigot.

[idwiyo]

85. K&R

[Octafish]

98. 'The incident demonstrates...the Obama administration will go to any lengths to silence Snowden...

...who has exposed the NSA’s vast electronic surveillance of the American people and the world’s population." -- Peter Symonds

Bolivia accuses US of forced landing of presidential plane

By Peter Symonds
5 July 2013

The Bolivian government is planning a formal protest to the United Nations over the illegal actions of European countries in forcing the plane of President Evo Morales to make an emergency landing in Austria on Tuesday. The aircraft was brought down on suspicion that National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower Edward Snowden was on board.

Morales was returning to Bolivia after an energy summit in Moscow, when Portugal, Italy, Spain and France all denied his plane access to their airspace. An unnamed Austrian official told Associated Press that the plane had requested permission to land in Vienna because there was “no clear indication” that it had enough fuel to continue its flight.

Bolivia’s ambassador to the UN, Sacha Liorenti Soliz, told the media: “The decisions of these countries violated international law. We are already making ready procedures to denounce this to the UN secretary general … We are talking about the president on an official trip, after an official summit, being kidnapped.”

Liorenti bluntly accused the Obama administration of instigating the forced landing. “We have no doubt that it was an order from the White House,” he said. “By no means should a diplomatic plane with the president be diverted from its route and forced to land in another country.”

[font color="red"]After initial US denials of any involvement, State Department spokesman Jen Psaki admitted on Wednesday: “We have been in contact with a range of countries that had a chance of having Snowden land or travel through their countries.” But she refused to name the countries, or divulge when the discussions took place.[/font color]

CONTINUED...

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/07/05/snow-j05.html

Incredible things, what those socialists like Morales are up to...universal health care, education, work, housing...

[idwiyo]

100. You don't say! Universal Health Care? OMG!1!! Quick, sprinkle some holy water around to ward off the

Satan of affordable housing!

[ReRe]

90. I'm old enough to remember that...

K&R

... the events would have been interpreted as an act of war. I can't understand why Pilger doesn't see it like that. I guess the world political stage has been moved so far to the right, that's why he calls it "piracy." What would have happened had that plane run out of gas while circling around up there and crashed to the ground? I know. "Just a tragic accident."

[idwiyo]

101. Wouldn't that be handy!

[Octafish]

109. US (and French) Courts Have Ruled Head-of-State Immunity is Absolute

Pilger is spot-on, IMO. Here's why from a more radical writer, describing the legality of the interception from an international POV:

US (and French) Courts Have Ruled Head-of-State Immunity is Absolute

In Obamaland, ‘Rule of Law’ is for the Other Suckers

by DAVE LINDORFF
CounterPunch WEEKEND EDITION JULY 5-7, 2013

EXCERPT...

In 2004, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (New York) ruled that Robert Mugabe, the corrupt and brutal leader of Zimbabwe, enjoyed “absolute immunity” while inside the US on a visit to New York. The decision stemmed from 2001, when a group of citizens of Zimbabwe sought to have Mugabe arrested in New York on charges of “extrajudicial killing, torture, terrorism, rape, beatings and other acts of violence and destruction.” A month earlier, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (Chicago), reached a similar conclusion in a case involving then Chinese President Jiang Zemin.

SNIP...

This makes the treatment of Bolivia’s President Morales, and the behavior of the European countries involved — France, Portugal and Spain initially for trapping Morales in mid-air and forcing him to land in Austria, Austria and Italy for trapping him in Austria and Austria for insisting on searching his presidential plane, and Russia for not protesting in the most forceful way the insulting treatment of a head of state that Russia had just hosted in a summit meeting — so outrageous.

Far from being guilty of any crime, Morales was detained by the actions of the US, France, Portugal, Spain and Austria simply because the US wants to capture Snowden, and thought Morales might be transporting him on his plane back to asylum in Bolivia. But had he been doing so, it would have been entirely within the rights of the president of Bolivia, who as a head of state could legally carry anything he wanted in his plane, whether a petitioner for sanctuary or a load of cocaine. (The US has long abused diplomatic immunity to ship contraband like weapons for use in various coup attempts in so-called “diplomatic pouches,” which are exempt from customs searches.)

The US of course, is the most egregious offender in this latest saga. In its desperate effort to capture Snowden, it is trashing the Vienna Convention of 1961 and a tradition of diplomatic immunity for heads of state that is of much more ancient origin.

The US does this not because it is legal, but because it can. American military and economic power allow the US government to brazenly ignore international law and custom because at least for the present no foreign power would dare to arrest or detain a US leader in the manner that Morales was detained and forced to allow his aircraft to be searched like a common criminal suspect. That situation could, of course change in future years, at which point Washington’s role in this incident will surely be brought up in some court.

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/07/05/in-obamaland-rule-of-law-is-for-the-other-suckers/

Lindorff, like the current situation in general, is making me feel like a mope.

Thank you, ReRe, for understanding the importance of what's going on. Secret Government is un-American and tyrannical.

[ReRe]

110. What's a "mope"?

When I replied to your OP, I hoped that you wouldn't take my comment about John Pilger negatively. I've been tuned into JP for years. As for the secrecy problem, I've been raising hell about that since about 1984. Isn't that a coincidence? I do believe that secrecy is the root of all our evils. Just think what a different country this would be were it not for the evil of secrecy. Thanks for the article by Lindorff from counterpunch.org. He doesn't mince words, does he? I like that kind of writer. To the point, no beating around the bush, chalked full of facts. We're a rogue nation, Octafishy. That's what we are now and I don't like it one bit.

Peace, love and no secrets.

[99Forever]

121. Isn't it great to see...

... our Democrat led government being the international bully?

It makes me so proud to admit I voted for them.

Live and learn.

[Octafish]

125. The progress on issues that have nothing to do with power and profit are nice.

Equal Rights, Civil Rights, Marriage Equality in the "Homeland" have certainly improved. But, each and every issue having to do with power and profit have gone the warmongers' way, including the disrespect shown toward the non-white world, from Bolivia, Haiti and Honduras to Pakistan, DR Congo, Egypt and any place else where the people are being separated from the resources by Wall Street and the ownership class.

Cruise Missile Liberals might want to read Bruce Dixon of Black Agenda Report's take on things:

Is This Barack Obama's 2nd Term or Bill Clinton's 3rd Term, or Ronald Regan's 9th?

They say that elections do matter, and that there are real differences between Republican and Democratic presidents. But backing up the view to 30 years, that difference looks a lot more like continuity, both at home and in America's global empire.

By Bruce A. Dixon
Black Agenda Report managing editor

The answer is yes to all three. Ronald Reagan hasn't darkened the White House door in decades. But his policy objectives have been what every president, Democrat and Republican have pursued relentlessly ever since. Barack Obama is only the latest and most successful of Reagan's disciples.

SNIP...

In Barack Obama's case all he had to say was that he wasn't necessarily against wars, just against what he called “stupid wars.” Corporate media and “liberal” shills morphed that lone statement into a false narrative that Barack Obama opposed the war in Iraq, making him an instantly viable presidential candidate at a time when the American people overwhelmingly opposed that war. Once in office, Barack Obama strove mightily to abrogate the Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq which would have allowed US forces to remain there indefinitely. But when the Iraqi puppet government, faced with a near revolt on the part of what remained of Iraqi civil society, dared not do his bidding, insisting that uniformed US troops (but not the American and multinational mercenaries we pay to remain there) stick to the withdrawal timetable agreed upon under Bush, liberal shills and corporate media hailed the withdrawal from Iraq as Obama's “victory.”

Barack Obama doubled down on the invasion and occupation of large areas of Afghanistan, and increased the size of the army and marines, which in fact he pledged to do during his presidential campaign. Presidential candidate Obama promised to end secret imprisonment and torture. The best one can say about President Obama on this score is that he seems to prefer murderous and indiscriminate drone attacks, in many cases, over the Bush policy of international kidnapping secret imprisonment and torture. The Obama administration's reliance on drones combined with US penetration of the African continent, means that a Democratic, ostensibly “antiwar” president has been able to openly deploy US troops to every part of that continent in support of its drive to control the oil, water, and other resources there.

The objectives President Obama's Africa policies fulfill today were put down on paper by the Bush administration, pursued by Bill Clinton before that, and still earlier pursued by Ronald Reagan, when it funded murderous contra armies of UNITA in Angola and RENAMO in Mozambque. It was UNITA and RENAMO's campaigns, assisted by the apartheid regimes of Israel and South Africa that pioneered the genocidal use of child soldiers. Today, cruise missile liberals hail the Obama administration's use of pit bull puppet regimes like Uganda, Burundi and Rwanda, all of which shot their way into power with child soldiers, to invade Somalia and Congo, sometimes ostensibly to go after other bad actors on the grounds that they are using child soldiers.

CONTINUED...

http://www.blackagendareport.com/content/barack-obamas-2nd-term-it-bill-clintons-3rd-or-it-ronald-reagans-9th

Those interested in the oilier aspects of foreign policy might enjoy Michael Klare of TomDispatch's take on things:

Is Barack Obama Morphing Into Dick Cheney?

Four Ways the President Is Pursuing Cheney’s Geopolitics of Global Energy

By Michael T. Klare
TomDispatch.com
June 21, 2012

EXCERPT...

For Cheney, the geopolitics of oil lay at the core of international relations, largely determining the rise and fall of nations. From this, it followed that any steps, including war and environmental devastation, were justified so long as they enhanced America’s power at the expense of its rivals.

Cheney’s World

Through his speeches, Congressional testimony, and actions in office, it is possible to reconstruct the geopolitical blueprint that Cheney followed in his career as a top White House strategist -- a blueprint that President Obama, eerily enough, now appears to be implementing, despite the many risks involved.

That blueprint consists of four key features:

1. Promote domestic oil and gas production at any cost to reduce America’s dependence on unfriendly foreign suppliers, thereby increasing Washington's freedom of action.

2. Keep control over the oil flow from the Persian Gulf (even if the U.S. gets an ever-diminishing share of its own oil supplies from the region) in order to retain an “economic stranglehold” over other major oil importers.

3. Dominate the sea lanes of Asia, so as to control the flow of oil and other raw materials to America’s potential economic rivals, China and Japan.

4. Promote energy “diversification” in Europe, especially through increased reliance on oil and natural gas supplies from the former Soviet republics of the Caspian Sea basin, in order to reduce Europe’s heavy dependence on Russian oil and gas, along with the political influence this brings Moscow.

CONTINUED...

http://www.tomdispatch.com/archive/175560/

I don't know what others heard in 2008, but I was led to believe there would be change in the government's approach to matters of war and peace, as well as in economic and energy policies. Looking back, I can see I was misled or some new philosophy took hold of the leadership.

[JEB]

128. It looks like our Gov. NSA or whoever must be hiding something dreadful.

Why else would they pull this kind of shit? I hope the truth comes out. The sooner the better.

[Octafish]

136. DC Madam's phone records hinted the corruption was in all three branches...

...including the Pentagon. The complete transcripts would be most useful for intimidation, extortion, and derailing policy - blackmail.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2007/04/28/12374/ross-white-house-madam/?mobile=wp

The story of Deborah Jeane Palfrey fell down the memory hole so fast, the concrete poured over it afterward was hot to the touch.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1311459

[JEB]

138. They sure are anxious to pour the concrete on the whole Snowden affair.

Although the treatment of Pres. Morales seems more like gas on the flame rather than concrete. They must really be in a panic.