Why are countries still cooperating with the United States on Snowden?

[ProSense]

Last week, America was a dying empire being dissed by the world. Today, President Obama is the most powerful man on earth, dictating to other countries when they can close their airspace?

Which is it?

I also ask again: Why didn't Bolivia's President give Snowden a lift?

There have been hints that various Presidents have offered to fly Snowden out of Russia on their planes.

Why is that not happening?

It's highly likely that these countries are seeing the information and situation for what it is: a distortion of events.

I mean, Snowden and Greenwald's initial reports were false (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023137494). He is selectively leaking information in an attempt to create a specific impression, and at the same time distorting the information being released.

It's likely these countries are seeing the big picture, and Snowden is losing credibility.

[graham4anything]

1. K&R

[leveymg]

2. Could it possibly be that NATO is still dominated by the US? Geez.

Also the key point made in the post you linked to has been discredited, and its author even acknowledges it. His assertion that NSA analysts and contractors can't view US Person communications without a warrant, FBI tasking, and close managerial supervision is undermined by the loophole in the PATRIOT Act that allows NSA to poke through US person data for 72 hours before seeking a FISA warrant. Recursion had said:

There is no situation where a single analyst can just look at whatever the hell he wants. Snowden was lying about that. What's more, the NSA isn't doing any of the gathering itself.

He partially withdraws that theory here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3141455

More lies supporting lies.

Surprise, surprise.

[ProSense]

5. Could be, but

"Could it possibly be that NATO is still dominated by the US? Geez."

...that apparently didn't factor into the claims about the impact of revealing U.S. state secrets to EU countries.

[leveymg]

10. I agree that there's some posturing, not to mention hypocricy, in Europe.

Again, not a surprise. This whole thing is, nonetheless, another embarrassing display of US impotent meddling.

[HipChick]

3. I think Assange floated the rumor that he was abroad..

It was a smokescreen for something else

[randome]

4. Clearly the NSA is blackmailing EVERYBODY!

Maybe even...me? Excuse me, I have some videotapes to burn.

[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]

[Jackpine Radical]

53. "I have some videotapes to burn. "

Too late. They already have them.

[treestar]

63. lol

This is bigger than all of you!!!!!!!!

Evo Morales is in on the conspiracy, too! Otherwise, he'd have Eddie on board!

[Bonobo]

6. Probably afraid of what the leaks may reveal about their own involvement. nt

[BenzoDia]

7. A little bit of this for sure.

[Buzz Clik]

45. +1

[Vietnameravet]

8. Because they dont want to give help to someone who has shown himself

to be a thief and a liar.. He might just do the same to them..They dont live in an Alice in Wonderland world where no one spies or the email of a suspected terrorist is not opened because that might be the end of freedom.

They know the job of government is to keep its citizens safe and their are plenty of people out there trying to bring harm to us and our allies as the incident in Canada today shows.

Until someone can figure out a way to stop terrorism and crime without surveillance, it will continue and they realize that and unlike some on this site, they dont glorify his kind.

[BlueCaliDem]

17. ^^ This! ^^

It's as if I wrote this post myself. Thanks, Vietnameravet.

[BeyondGeography]

30. Along those lines, Correa's statement the other day was interesting

On whether Correa would like to meet him, the president said: "Not particularly. He's a very complicated person. Strictly speaking, Mr Snowden spied for some time."

[Cha]

58. I remember that now.. and it most definitely goes along

those lines of VEV's post.

[Buzz Clik]

46. +1

[Jessy169]

48. This vietnameravet agrees with Vietnameravet

And another possible reason:

Because in the real world, there are sometimes very good reasons to prevent some information from leaking out to the general populace. Information that maybe you or I could handle, but that the hoards of lemmings and low-intellect masses -- of which we have PLENTY in this country and around the world -- might just start a stampede over. And once that stampede gets started there is no way to stop it.

Our future world is chock full of known and unknown dangers. Maybe, just maybe, responsible world leaders who might sympathize with Snowden on the broad principle of personal privacy might also realize that one or two self-righteous leakers like Snowden is all it takes to start an avalanche that will bury a lot of people.

[Cha]

59. Good post, thanks Jessy. No leader wants what happened to the US on 9/11

to happen in their country.

[treestar]

64. Hell yes, some asshole like that could start WWIII

[Myrina]

49. Uhhhh .... Senator McKain, is that you?

Wow. Just .... wow.

[caseymoz]

50. Like they're going to put Snowden . . .

in a role where he could damage them?

I think any reluctance might be based on the fact that they would have to like, keep him incognito and feed and house him. It's hard to do in some countries, and hard to justify when your peoples' per capita income is $2000 a year. Add to those, the fact that our intelligence services can then agitate the right wing people against a government keeping him (they've done things like that in the past). I like what Snowden did, but he does make it especially difficult for himself by not shutting up and keeping his face out of the news. I think they had him totally out of sight, and then he surfaced himself again, which is why Putin advised him to stop making America mad.

You're wrong, other countries definitely can't and won't put him to work for their governments, and that would be the only role they could put him in that would solve most of the problems above. It would at least justify room and board.

I disagree with you about "keeping citizens safe." If it weren't for the NSA and CIA interfering aggressively in other countries, we wouldn't need the NSA or CIA. They created the problems that we now keep them on the payroll to solve. The more they screw us up, the more we need them to protect us. That's the truth about our intelligence services, and our military.

We should have never let the NSA and the CIA exist beyond 1992. (Nor kept the military at superpower size, nor kept NATO). The inhumanities they committed and the infamy and rage those brought on us internationally made those agencies barely justifiable during the Cold War. Now, they can only bring trouble on us domestically and internationally, and they have. They will as long as we keep them. They don't belong in a democracy, period.

[Cha]

56. Excellent analysis, Vietnameravet nm

[Whisp]

69. yes, some day they might be the ones asking for help

to catch their liar and thief.

[Pholus]

9. Guess you're bummed Snowden wasn't on the plane. nt

[Cha]

60. More like Snowden's bummed he wasn't on the plane. nm

[Pholus]

65. I just enjoy DU bloodthirst. It makes me giggle. nt

[Cha]

66. Yeah, I'll bet it does. nm

[Pholus]

67. Yup. When I see neocon-speak around things like this OP it just shows....

how far we sunk and how much worse we are than we think we are.

[Cha]

68. Yeah, I bet you do. nm

[Pholus]

70. Buck up, you have almost destroyed the right to privacy!

“Some journalists, in my judgment, just can’t stand success, especially a few liberal columnists and newspapers and a few Arab reporters.”

-- Dick Cheney the inspiration for the Greenwald Derangement Syndrome crowd

or is it Napoleon perhaps...

"It is not necessary to bury the truth. It is sufficient merely to delay it until nobody cares."

-- Napoleon Bonaparte

[kentuck]

11. Most likely scenario, in my opinion...

..is that the leaders of most of these countries are spying on their people also, and just like the leaders of our country, do not want the people to find out. They work very closely with the NSA and CIA, in my opinion.

[Buzz Clik]

47. Yep.

[muriel_volestrangler]

12. Money? The world's biggest military, by far?

And the use of surveillance themselves, when it's convenient.

[liberal N proud]

13. WOW!

What a fabrication of conspiracy

[zeemike]

38. Yes but it is in defense of Obama.

And that is permissable...and common.

[ProSense]

54. I suppose

"What a fabrication of conspiracy"

...that the next "fabrication of conspiracy" is going to be questioning this country's status as a "rogue state"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3158374

Despite the response, there is no "conspiracy" in the OP. It was a question directly related to current events and the reactions from some.

[struggle4progress]

14. (1) Maybe the US shares some of its anti-terrorist intel, and folk like sharing;

(2) Maybe Snowden's "Hi! I'm a brilliant hacker, and I got a national security job so I could leak everything I learned worldwide. Do you mind if I move to your country for a while to do what I do?" doesn't inspire loads of confidence; or (3) Maybe it's just not such an appealing prospect to provide a platform from which Snowden could publicize indiscriminately everybody's lists of critical IT infrastructure to the enlightenment of whoever wherever

[newfie11]

15. Maybe their afraid they will be next on our list to invade

[JPZenger]

16. Many countries are still negotiating trade deals with the US

besides, if you say no to Snowden, you are one of 100. If you say yes, you will be targeted.

I expect him to end up in Venezuela, if he can get there. He might have to take a ship.

[justiceischeap]

18. I find it unlikely the US doesn't know what Snowden has in terms of leakable intelligence

They may be sharing some of that information with other countries.

A lot of people are holding Snowden up as this unimpeachable hero but we don't know the entire story of what's going on and what information he actually has. Yes, spying on American citizens is horrible but it's not new information. NOVA did a documentary about it in 2009--specifically on this issue. What we don't know is if he has information about undercover operatives in other countries and that could include foreign operatives that could be compromised. Snowden has shown he has no qualms about putting these folks' safety in jeopardy and that is something we should be rightfully outraged about as well. We were when Bushco. outed Valerie Plame.

I'm not saying we should forgive the US government their trespasses but I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they have more information than the public.

[davidpdx]

19. We've already found out that 2 countries did not, as reported tell the Bolivian president

he could not fly through their airspace.

[sikofit3]

20. got an updated link for that?

[BumRushDaShow]

22. Here

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/03/bolivia-snowden_n_3539179.html

French government spokeswoman Najat Vallaud-Belkacem said "France ended up authorizing the flight over its airspace by Mr. Morales' plane."

<snip>

Spain's foreign ministry said in a statement Wednesday that the country on Tuesday authorized Morales' plane to fly within its airspace and to make a refueling stop in the Canary Islands, and gave the authorization again on Wednesday morning after Bolivian authorities repeated the request.

<snip>

The Portuguese Foreign Ministry said in a written statement Wednesday that Portugal had granted permission for the plane to fly through its air space but declined Bolivia's request for a refueling stop in Lisbon due to unspecified technical reasons.

Italian officials were not available to speak on the subject Wednesday morning.

[randome]

24. This sounded more like rumor mongering by James O'Kee...I mean, Julian Assange.

So many little spy wannabes. So little time.

[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]

[Pholus]

33. Equivocation never works well when it replaces a simple answer.

French government spokeswoman Najat Vallaud-Belkacem said "France ended up authorizing the flight over its airspace by Mr. Morales' plane."

Why were the words "ended up" needed in that sentence?

She said the plane "was authorized to fly over French territory" but wouldn't explain whether there had been an initial refusal Tuesday night amid the rumors about Snowden's presence on the plane.

What does "wouldn't explain" mean?

A foreign ministry official declined comment when asked if Spain demanded the right to inspect the plane. The Spanish spoke on condition of anonymity because of ministry rules.

Why decline to comment if a simple "no" makes it go away.

[randome]

34. Because bureaucracies have many moving parts.

Why would a foreign ministry official make an unequivocal remark when he/she hasn't had time to check with everyone? He/She gave the best answer available but it might not be a complete answer.

'Ended up' could refer to the fuel problem that was reportedly part of this mix-up.

If it was a conspiracy, don't you think they would have been more unequivocal instead of giving wriggle room for alternate explanations?

In fact, if we heard a straight-forward 'No' right off the bat, I'd be suspicious of that.

[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]

[Pholus]

36. Cool then. So we HAVEN'T found out that 2 countries have denied this then.

We'll just wait until they've "had time to check with everyone."

[DisgustipatedinCA]

37. Oh look...it's the guy who counsels keeping a cool head until all the faxes....uh, facts, are in.

And look, there you are creating yet-another far-fetched scenario to cover for thuggery. You're just as impressive as you've always been.

[randome]

42. Why, yes, I suppose I am.

[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]

[Cha]

61. Indeed you are!

Beautiful!

[MattSh]

26. Oh, please...

You don't think it's possible that the USA requested that airspace be closed?

Then they were told to deny that the airspace was ever closed? Or that there had even been a request?

In a bid to make the Bolivian president look a bit stupid?

It seems that ploy works for some, even here on DU.

[randome]

41. And all the air traffic controllers are being blackmailed?

[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]

[zeemike]

43. Oh no, that could never happen.

We are so honest and honerable....would never lie to us or the world.
And never try to make Morales look bad...
That is just bat shit crazy talk...
(sarcasm) in case you don't know.

[davidpdx]

62. I didn't say that

I said two countries have denied the claim made by Bolivia's president. There are plenty of articles about it.

[NCTraveler]

21. Why would these leaders give such a man a "lift".

It would make no sense. What does Obama have to do with it? The list of reasons the leader of any nation wouldn't want to give passage to a lying traitor is long. He is not worth the problems.

"President Obama is the most powerful man on earth, dictating to other countries when they can close their airspace?"

I think most of us don't read that with the same amount of adoration and pride as you.

[Andy823]

25. Good points

Yesterday the US was the most hated country on earth, at least if you listen to some of the Snowden admirers. So why would the most hated country be able to tell those who hate us what to do?

As has already been posted, I believe that all the hype over what Snowden "leaked" is not all it was supposed to be. I think other countries are finding this out and want nothing to do with this "scandal". One moment we hear all the information has been given to the media to sift through and then put out what they want, and the news Greenwald is telling fox news that something big is going to come out. Lots of hype if you ask me.

[dkf]

23. Maybe we have incriminating and embarassing info on all of them.

That's what happens when we have all the data all the time. Rulers of the world, dictating it all in secret. Sick.

[Bluenorthwest]

27. Cooperation would be proven by US custody of Snowden. If nations are so

cooperative, why does he still evade capture by the great and powerful NSA? Are they so mediocre that no only do they fail to prevent Boston type attacks but they can't capture a single IT guy even with vast international cooperation?

[Zorra]

28. Outside San Cristobal de la Casas, Chiapas, Mexico, 1996-97 ~

Here is the comprehensive answer to your question; there are, naturally, some inaccuracies in historical development, but all in all, you can take most of this back to the bank with you.

The supreme kind of capital, financial capital, began then to develop its strategy of war towards the new world and over what was left of the old. Hand in hand with the technological revolution which placed the entire world, through a computer, on its desk and at its mercy, the financial markets imposed their laws and precepts on the entire planet. The "globalization" of the new war is nothing more than the globalization of the logic of the financial markets. The National States (and their leaders) went from being directors of the economy to those who were directed, better said tele-directed, by the basic premise of financial power: free commercial exchange. Not only that, but the logic of the market took advantage of the "porosity" which in all the social spectrum of the world, provoked the development of telecommunications and penetrated and appropriated all the aspects of social activity. Finally there was a global war which was total!
snip----
The careful and ordered escapade which the "Cold War" handed down, the "new world order" quickly became pieces due to the neoliberal explosion. World capitalism sacrificed without mercy that which gave it a future and a historic project; national capitalism. Companies and States fell apart in minutes, but not due to the torments of proletarian revolutions, but the stalemates of financial hurricanes. The child (neoliberalism) ate the father (national capitalism) and in passing destroyed all of the discursive fallacies of capitalist ideology: in the new world order there is no democracy, liberty, equality, nor fraternity.
-snip====
And when we say "megapolitics" we don't refer to the number of those who move in them. There are a few, very few, who find themselves in this "megasphere". Megapolitics globalizes national politics, in other words, it subjects it to a direction that has global interests (that for the most part are contradictory to national interests) and whose logic is that of the market, which is to say, of economic profit. With this economist (and criminal) criteria, wars, credits, selling and buying of merchandise, diplomatic acknowledgements, commercial blocks, political supports, migration laws, coups, repressions, elections, international political unity, political ruptures and investments are decided upon. In short the survival of entire nations.

The global power of the financial centers is so great, that they can afford not to worry about the political tendency of those who hold power in a nation, if the economic program (in other words, the role that nation has in the global economic megaprogram) remains unaltered. The financial disciplines impose themselves upon the different colors of the world political spectrum in regards to the government of any nation. The great world power can tolerate a leftist government in any part of the world, as long as the government does not take measures that go against the needs of the world financial centers. But in no way will it tolerate that an alternative economic, political and social organization consolidate. For the megapolitics, the national politics are dwarfed and submit to the dictates of the financial centers. It will be this way until the dwarfs rebel . .

http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/mexico/ezln/1997/jigsaw.html

[countmyvote4real]

35. +1

[blm]

29. Because they ALL have been doing basically the same thing for decades.

I'm still amazed that there is anyone in this country that claims they didn't know. Who here at DU ever believed that Bush's TIPS was shelved? The corpmedia who claimed it was shelved were protecting Bush. Those pretending to be shocked now are using it to undermine US leadership under THIS president....smoothing the way for Jeb2016.

[KharmaTrain]

31. The Irony...

...are some of those who have turned Snowden into some romantic cold war hero who is running from the law were calling for the international court at the Hague to prosecute either President Obama or the U.S. (never too sure, the hyperbole and word salad never specified) over last night's plane fiasco. The poutrage is turned to 11...it's now somehow turned into an act of war.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

32. Petro Dollars

Is at the top of a long list of tools in our diplomatic strong arm tool box.

[flpoljunkie]

39. Perhaps fear of retaliation by the most powerful country in the world?

At least we have 26 senators who are not rolling over and are demanding answers for what legal authority the NSA has to collect bulk records on Americans.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/interactive/2013/jun/28/senators-letter-james-clapper

[MichaelKelley]

40. Same here

I also do not understand this that why the other countries are supporting this issue, I doubt if they are doing so to get some favor from the government. I will go through this thread and will try to understand the issue.

[Buzz Clik]

44. Because everybody is spying on everyone else, but the voters everywhere don't like it ...

... and like to pretend that their country is too pure and too honest to do it.

[Nye Bevan]

51. Interesting to see all these countries so eager to please the USA.

I guess it's good to be the king.

[panAmerican]

52. The American dollar is a great diplomatic tool

[Cha]

55. I should hope the leaders of these various countries are

smart enough to see through Greenwald's and Snowden's attempt to bring down Pres Obama through their big Leaks R Us Hypocrisy Tour.

Why didn't Pres Morales give Snowden a lift out of Russia? Bolivia sounds like it's right up Snowden's alley..

A life inside the land-locked Latin American country has its perks to someone trying to evade the U.S. justice system. Morales, a self-described Marxist, has ended most of his country’s cooperation with the U.S. government since assuming power in 2006. He has expelled U.S. diplomats, stopped working with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, and shown little interest in free-trade agreements. In 2009, he urged his citizens not to eat chicken because it caused baldness and homosexuality.

“He could just show up back home with Snowden and make a big splash.”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/02/is-edward-snowden-bound-for-bolivia-evo-morales-sure-seems-to-hope-so.html

[Safetykitten]

57. I would love to see you have Mr. Snowden over for dinner and drinks.