General Discussion

sibelian

(7,804 posts)

142. Hm.

Thu Jul 4, 2013, 02:27 PM

Jul 2013

Well I suppose I was operating from the assumption that such an admission of error would be off the cards by default... Now that you put that out, it doesn't sound at all unreasonable. Except Bolivia would probably still say "fuck off."

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

223 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

White House Dares EU Leaders to Rat On United States in Morales Flyover Affair [View all] wtmusic Jul 2013 OP

You would need to supply just 1 piece of evidence that the US dictated anything to any country flamingdem Jul 2013 #1

Psst--Evo Morales signed a trade deal with Iran this week. And the Egyptian military.... msanthrope Jul 2013 #2

Thanks, good info nt flamingdem Jul 2013 #4

Following the money leads to more answers than not--but it is amusing to watch the poutrage msanthrope Jul 2013 #7

I didn't want to see it at first but the statements by the Bolivian ministers were ridiculous flamingdem Jul 2013 #13

What utter rubbish! Comrade Grumpy Jul 2013 #20

Given the rise it got out of you, I suspect that the 'follow the money' approach is where Occam's msanthrope Jul 2013 #24

Speculate much? go west young man Jul 2013 #180

And? Spider Jerusalem Jul 2013 #34

Thank you! I've been accused of fabricating the Iranian trade deal. Now, correct me if I am wrong, msanthrope Jul 2013 #44

"in good standing" reusrename Jul 2013 #216

Can you tell me why there is a problem letting Iran help develop Mojorabbit Jul 2013 #86

I'm glad to see the attempts at free trade!! Aren't you glad to see another OPEC like msanthrope Jul 2013 #114

I have no problem with Bolivia developing their resources. nt Mojorabbit Jul 2013 #168

I am. dipsydoodle Jul 2013 #172

Yes--because Putin's organization is going to do that? He just wants a piece of the pie. nt msanthrope Jul 2013 #174

Pie does''nt come into it. dipsydoodle Jul 2013 #182

See, your post is one of those valuable nuggests nestled into the rest of DU. I think we argue KittyWampus Jul 2013 #151

You are quite welcome. I tend to take a fairly cynical view when politicians bang the table. I msanthrope Jul 2013 #154

I had the same thought Life Long Dem Jul 2013 #223

Why shouldn't he sign deals with Iran, or any other country he wants to?? What is sabrina 1 Jul 2013 #222

Two things. The state dept is absolutely refusing to answer whether they were involved in it. morningfog Jul 2013 #11

This guy is incompetent. Soliz has no proof but he made that statement. flamingdem Jul 2013 #14

And bullshit from the Austrian foreign minister too, I guess? magellan Jul 2013 #54

This sounds routine, sad that "reporters" want to turn it into an incident nt flamingdem Jul 2013 #65

Not reporters, direct quotes. magellan Jul 2013 #70

You're reading the wrong sources flamingdem Jul 2013 #71

Really? lol magellan Jul 2013 #85

People with their backs to the wall Aerows Jul 2013 #191

#1. "reportedly said" is NOT a direct quote. #2. you seem to imagine that as the Bolivian president KittyWampus Jul 2013 #156

Yes, linked to a tweet by Austrian broadcast journalist Tanja Malle who was right there magellan Jul 2013 #167

The U.S had EVERYTHING to do with it! rusty fender Jul 2013 #153

But, it's his fucking opinion and he doesn't need any further proof. lol nm Cha Jul 2013 #221

I'm really not sure what the controversy is here. stevenleser Jul 2013 #3

Absolute diplomatic immunity for head of state is why. morningfog Jul 2013 #6

See my post #2--It's Evo's money trail. I'd saber rattle before I answered questions about Iran, msanthrope Jul 2013 #8

Just because we in the US see Iran as Enemy #1... ljm2002 Jul 2013 #19

Indeed--but UN members are obliged to follow sanction regimes. Follow the money. nt msanthrope Jul 2013 #30

Yes, that is a fair point... n/t ljm2002 Jul 2013 #37

You clearly don't even know what the sanctions entail Spider Jerusalem Jul 2013 #43

Dude--they can transfer the technology, but if the Iranians can't get paid due to the double whammy msanthrope Jul 2013 #52

You're diverting this thread faster than Evo's jet wtmusic Jul 2013 #73

When you can point me to the American air-traffic controller, or the diplomat, or the msanthrope Jul 2013 #76

You believe all of these governments acted alone, do you? wtmusic Jul 2013 #78

Nope, that is not what that person is saying. stevenleser Jul 2013 #87

Please don't cut and paste your same comment from elsewhere in the thread. wtmusic Jul 2013 #100

Don't tell me what I should put in my posts. stevenleser Jul 2013 #102

Do Heads of State have absolute diplomatic immunity? cherokeeprogressive Jul 2013 #106

Just wait for it Aerows Jul 2013 #109

Too late, I already responded. And your assumptions are wrong! ROFLMAO! stevenleser Jul 2013 #116

International Law Aerows Jul 2013 #117

LOL, if you are so familiar with it, post links to the laws and to the court decisions that stevenleser Jul 2013 #120

LOL nailed it. n/t cherokeeprogressive Jul 2013 #188

I would generally say yes. I have to look up the specifics on that. But that assumes several things stevenleser Jul 2013 #110

So you just admit you have know knowledge of international law Aerows Jul 2013 #119

Nope, my contentions have to do with something else entirely. Nice try though! LMAO!!!! stevenleser Jul 2013 #123

You stated you'd have to look it up Aerows Jul 2013 #125

Which is generally what I say when someone makes an unrelated point. stevenleser Jul 2013 #131

We're back to "I don't know" Aerows Jul 2013 #133

Nope, you are still not addressing my initial points after multiple tries! stevenleser Jul 2013 #135

Because you can't address the fundamental one Aerows Jul 2013 #139

The song and dance Aerows Jul 2013 #132

What do US banking sanctions have to do with transfer of funds by Bolivia? Spider Jerusalem Jul 2013 #81

ahem--then you haven't been paying attention. OFAC has effectively shut down the Iranian msanthrope Jul 2013 #98

Which affects a direct transfer of funds from BOLIVIA to IRAN, how, exactly? Spider Jerusalem Jul 2013 #105

We just halted gold and currency trade in Iran-- msanthrope Jul 2013 #128

That's correct. It's up to those other countries to decide what they want to do, which is my point. stevenleser Jul 2013 #33

And five EU countries simultainiously decided to deny Morales airspace... HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #111

Nope, for the umpteenth time, that is not my contention. stevenleser Jul 2013 #112

Yes, there are many differences. HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #138

Precious few are so privileged as to be able to commit an act/acts of war with impunity and have no indepat Jul 2013 #218

You are making assumptions without evidence treestar Jul 2013 #126

Morales probably flew over those countries on the way TO Moscow. HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #140

Probably? How did he go? treestar Jul 2013 #175

The route is determined by the plane's range and fuel stops. HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #179

I agree this is the background of the incident flamingdem Jul 2013 #9

Yes, something is very much different about this Spider Jerusalem Jul 2013 #10

These denials that are being offered Aerows Jul 2013 #31

Which is an issue for those countries denying transit, yes? nt stevenleser Jul 2013 #68

Not if they denied transit subsequent to a direct request from the USA, it isn't Spider Jerusalem Jul 2013 #94

Which is a massive assumption to make without proof, isn't it? nt stevenleser Jul 2013 #96

Not really, no Spider Jerusalem Jul 2013 #101

It's a pretty big leap. Particularly considering that these countries are happy to tell us to jump stevenleser Jul 2013 #103

If Snowden is "an international criminal"... ljm2002 Jul 2013 #15

By "international criminal" I meant one not currently in the place where the warrant was issued. stevenleser Jul 2013 #35

And my point is... ljm2002 Jul 2013 #40

How do you know he is not on Interpol? nt msanthrope Jul 2013 #59

Try this: ljm2002 Jul 2013 #77

Funny--I just searched for Assange, and he wasn't there, either. msanthrope Jul 2013 #152

How about a statement from Interpol? ljm2002 Jul 2013 #157

We wouldn't use a red notice on Snowden--we don't recognize the red notice as giving msanthrope Jul 2013 #164

So now you're an authority on our use of Interpol? ljm2002 Jul 2013 #170

No--but I can read the DOJ regs on use of Interpol. I had a question, looked it up. It was news msanthrope Jul 2013 #173

I see. Now you seem to think Interpol might be relevant... ljm2002 Jul 2013 #178

Did I say it was irrelevant? I am sure if it has a role to play, it will. nt msanthrope Jul 2013 #181

True, you never said it was irrelevant... ljm2002 Jul 2013 #185

What controversy? wtmusic Jul 2013 #16

"The United States has a public relations problem". This. nt galileoreloaded Jul 2013 #41

Actually, the US has several public relations problems. HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #149

The United States has a public relations problem.... whistler162 Jul 2013 #163

uh, are you kidding? It was the plane of the President of a sovereign nation. cali Jul 2013 #18

Nope, I am not kidding. If Air Force One travels through another country's airspace it has to obey stevenleser Jul 2013 #25

so you would have no problem with China cali Jul 2013 #45

Are you saying that China does not have the sovereignty over its airspace and waters to do so? stevenleser Jul 2013 #55

Unsurprising Aerows Jul 2013 #21

What 'thing' are you accusing me of 'vociferously denying' ? nt stevenleser Jul 2013 #26

That this was an international incident Aerows Jul 2013 #39

its more than mere damage control. galileoreloaded Jul 2013 #49

True Aerows Jul 2013 #51

you cant blame em though. galileoreloaded Jul 2013 #56

None involving the US, that is correct, that is my contention. I can perhaps understand stevenleser Jul 2013 #57

LMFAO! Aerows Jul 2013 #107

LMAO If I'm so wrong, provide me the facts that say so. You are hilarious. stevenleser Jul 2013 #115

Uh huh Aerows Jul 2013 #122

Because I am arguing a different point entirely. Once again, nice try!!! stevenleser Jul 2013 #124

If you can't make your point Aerows Jul 2013 #127

I havent made an inconsistent point yet. I'll repost my initial contention again for you. stevenleser Jul 2013 #130

You haven't exactly made a point yet, either Aerows Jul 2013 #143

I haven't leaped to an unsupported conclusion, that much is true. stevenleser Jul 2013 #159

I'm confused? Aerows Jul 2013 #161

Oh there ya go ...that's just going to piss off the worshipers. L0oniX Jul 2013 #89

its interesting how comfortable people get when they build callouses to the chains they wear galileoreloaded Jul 2013 #23

That's a cute post that happens to say nothing factual or specific. Like I said, cute. nt stevenleser Jul 2013 #28

at issue is that you cant even see the issue. you are owned, outright. i dont blame you. nt galileoreloaded Jul 2013 #38

That's what it looks like to me Aerows Jul 2013 #42

At issue is that you can't come up with a single fact to support you, after multiple posts. nt stevenleser Jul 2013 #53

My mistake was engaging you in complex abstractions. my apologies. nt galileoreloaded Jul 2013 #60

No, your mistake was attempting to engage when you had no facts to support you. nt stevenleser Jul 2013 #66

+1 L0oniX Jul 2013 #91

Sir, no offense Aerows Jul 2013 #48

I stand on my points. The US made a perfectly normal request. Can you prove otherwise? stevenleser Jul 2013 #64

Your points are irrelevant to the issue stated in OP. wtmusic Jul 2013 #72

The US request was normal and not in error. Can you prove otherwise? nt stevenleser Jul 2013 #79

Yes. By all accounts, Snowden wasn't on the plane. wtmusic Jul 2013 #82

And? I will once again restate my contention stevenleser Jul 2013 #84

Not sure how much simpler I can make this. wtmusic Jul 2013 #88

LOL, your assertion involves multiple layers for which you have no proof or even semblence of facts. stevenleser Jul 2013 #92

And you believe all of these governments acted alone. wtmusic Jul 2013 #99

I'm one of those strange people that likes facts to back up accusations. I know, weird, right? stevenleser Jul 2013 #104

No, you're in denial wtmusic Jul 2013 #108

If you're so convinced of that, provide me the facts that inform your opinion. stevenleser Jul 2013 #113

Here you go, you can open your eyes and unplug your ears now. wtmusic Jul 2013 #136

All that does is prove my initial contention. See bolded part stevenleser Jul 2013 #141

No one gives a crap about your initial contention. It's irrelevant. wtmusic Jul 2013 #147

The advantage my contentions have over yours is that they are true. nt stevenleser Jul 2013 #158

the best part of this discussion is that you VEHEMENTLY denied any US involvement yesterday.. frylock Jul 2013 #213

LOL! Wow. You really have gotten your DU stride. Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #75

im a giver! nt galileoreloaded Jul 2013 #83

+1 L0oniX Jul 2013 #95

1. U.S. has egg on it's face is the big one - so much for their Total Information Awareness. 2. usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #58

Would it be okay for China to hold Pres. Obama because of a rumor? Marrah_G Jul 2013 #194

How about International Law for $2,000 malaise Jul 2013 #207

I keep wondering when our "leaders" will tire of these shenanigans. bemildred Jul 2013 #5

They haven't gotten past the whole "It ain't real until we say so." thing. Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2013 #184

Yep. It's like they just cannot believe it's not going to work. nt bemildred Jul 2013 #186

What's funny is when they all agree on something that's total fiction,... Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2013 #187

Cognitive disconnect, and it's recursive too. bemildred Jul 2013 #189

What's REALLY funny is when polls are manipulated... Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2013 #193

declining to say whether American Authorities had asked other countries to deny airspace cali Jul 2013 #12

If they had asked it's very possible any one of five countries could have ratted them out flamingdem Jul 2013 #17

the WH statement is as classic an example of a non-admission admission as you could cali Jul 2013 #61

The US rep can't speak for what other countries do and their policies nt flamingdem Jul 2013 #63

that is not an answer. at least not an answer to the question asked. cali Jul 2013 #90

She explained that they've been in contact with the countries involved in possible asylum nt flamingdem Jul 2013 #93

Thanks for the advice. wtmusic Jul 2013 #27

That is certainly a fair interpretation of what's going on. n/t DirkGently Jul 2013 #22

"Psaki, declined to say whether American authorities had asked other countries to deny airspace" n/t PoliticAverse Jul 2013 #29

Someone who doesn't understand TOS alerted on you for a TOS violation. Melinda Jul 2013 #32

Juror 2 should be off juries forever cthulu2016 Jul 2013 #36

An example of why the clown jury system is fucked up. L0oniX Jul 2013 #97

Agreed. nt HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #118

Juror 2 owes wtmusic a big apology, imho - nt HardTimes99 Jul 2013 #144

thanks wtmusic Jul 2013 #47

The White House has nothing whatsoever to lose from outright denial if they are not responsible. sibelian Jul 2013 #46

Of course they can simply confirm it. wtmusic Jul 2013 #50

Hm. sibelian Jul 2013 #142

There's always that risk wtmusic Jul 2013 #169

! sibelian Jul 2013 #200

Couple that with the nations involved saying they "will neither confirm nor deny" US pressure. morningfog Jul 2013 #62

But in the meantime why not have a super duper POUTRAGE attack! flamingdem Jul 2013 #69

The Austrian WovenGems Jul 2013 #67

Hah! The silence of the administration is the equivalent as the admission of guilt! Buzz Clik Jul 2013 #74

Guilty of what? wtmusic Jul 2013 #80

It's so medieval treestar Jul 2013 #121

No one in the world is blind to what's going on wtmusic Jul 2013 #134

Well, the world doesn't have a 5th Amendment. sibelian Jul 2013 #145

......... ohheckyeah Jul 2013 #129

Thanks for info. wtmusic Jul 2013 #137

Somehow I think I was just insulted. n/t ohheckyeah Jul 2013 #146

My bad. wtmusic Jul 2013 #148

LOL - no problem. ohheckyeah Jul 2013 #150

LOL Kurovski Jul 2013 #220

I think this is peculiar. sibelian Jul 2013 #160

Thank you! I have been looking for that quote since yesterday! nt Mojorabbit Jul 2013 #165

You're welcome. n/t ohheckyeah Jul 2013 #166

The US AMBASSADOR to Austria called Austria's Foreign Department to report Snowden was on board Catherina Jul 2013 #155

Would you mind reposting as an OP, Catherina? sibelian Jul 2013 #162

Seconded. wtmusic Jul 2013 #171

Done Catherina Jul 2013 #203

Done Catherina Jul 2013 #202

Thank you! :) sibelian Jul 2013 #212

This message was self-deleted by its author KoKo Jul 2013 #183

Ambassadors don't have the pull to ask their hostOp country to detain and inspect ano HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #199

Totally correct. These guys follow instructions Catherina Jul 2013 #204

Agreed. Portugal, et al don't want a war with Bolivia. HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #208

"I would point you to (European govts) to describe why they made descisions, if they made decisions" Jack Rabbit Jul 2013 #176

Am I the only one to look at that picture and consider the media there WANTS this story? Spitfire of ATJ Jul 2013 #177

I don't think President Obama instructed our allies to deny Morales's airplane flyover and Cleita Jul 2013 #190

Of course he did. That is not a decision an Ambassador can independantly make. HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #201

What ambassador are you talking about, the one from Spain who wanted to board Cleita Jul 2013 #205

US Ambassador to Austria. HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #206

Yes, but he was allowed to land in Austria and refuel. No one refused the plane to fly Cleita Jul 2013 #209

Well, at some point the plane had to land and refuel. HooptieWagon Jul 2013 #211

I would think that commandeering a plane with a head of state on board is an act of war Jack Rabbit Jul 2013 #214

There's more than one diplomatic blunder here. Cleita Jul 2013 #215

The only diplomatic blunder I refer to is delaying Prsident Morales' flight in this manner Jack Rabbit Jul 2013 #217

Anyone that believes the U.S. is saintly and above all other countries Rex Jul 2013 #192

I doubt anyone believes that. randome Jul 2013 #195

I don't. Rex Jul 2013 #197

No one with a grain of sense does Aerows Jul 2013 #198

I'd be surprised if some folks in this thread Aerows Jul 2013 #196

Look for more Spanish businesses to run into trouble mitchtv Jul 2013 #210

Wow. So many officials suddenly go mum all at once 99th_Monkey Jul 2013 #219