Disinformation and manipulation created the Evogate narrative - Starting with Portugal

[flamingdem]

Last edited Thu Jul 4, 2013, 03:03 PM - Edit history (2)

Portugal (please see posts 1-6 below for updates on Spain, France, Austria, Ambassador Eacho in Austria, and other claims)

False: The Bolivian plane was refused passage through Portugese airspace

Clarification: The Portuguese foreign ministry said that Portugal had granted permission for the plane to fly through its airspace but declined Bolivia's request for a refuelling stop in Lisbon due to unspecified technical reasons.

Update, Thursday: According to a statement from Portugal's Ministry of Foreign Affairs excerpted by Negocios Online (and translated by a reporter that contacted us), Portugal and Bolivia went back and forth for two days over how Morales' plane might use Portuguese airspace. On Monday, Portugal told Bolivia it could fly over Portugal but not stop and refuel in Lisbon due to "technical reasons." The Bolivia pilots insisted on including that stop in their flight plan; Portugal again said it wasn't possible. Eventually, the Bolivian plane asked to fly over Portuguese territory to land in Las Palmas, a territory of Spain of the West African coast. That request was granted.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs ends its statement by saying, in essence: Sorry for the inconvenience, but you had 24 hours to develop an alternate route, and didn't.

--------------
Bolivian Statement:

Bolivia’s foreign minister, David Choquehuanca, said the refusals stemmed from “unfounded suspicions that Mr. Snowden was on the plane.”

** Choquehuanca never gives proof for the unfounded suspicions or said he was told it was about Snowden
This could be seen as an invention minus that proof.


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

[dkf]

1. What would happen if Air Force One got that treatment?

I don't see how your post alleviates any suspicion whatsoever.

All this nitpicky crap when the real scandal is how other countries feel the necessity to jump when the US says jump.

[msanthrope]

25. AF1 wouldn't get that treatment because there's a limited number of airports it can use, and those

uses are carefully preplanned. I suspect the White House knows how to file a flight plan on time.

[dkf]

27. And when a fuel gauge goes bad?

No room for contingencies right?

[msanthrope]

37. It depends---if the pilot declared an emergency then the emergency protocols would kick

in and be followed.

But the pilot of Evo's plane didn't declare an emergency.

[dkf]

42. Oh my didn't follow the exact protocol when the AIRPLANE WAS POSSIBLY LOW ON FUEL.

That's just great.

[itsrobert]

30. They would just fly to the Azores

A big refueling stop of Air Force planes. If necessary.

[msanthrope]

38. That would be my guess. Or one of the German bases. nt

[tammywammy]

61. AF1 can be refueled mid-air. n/t

[itsrobert]

62. And that tanker would fly from the Azores or Mildenhall

nm

[leveymg]

2. You're one of our local expert on those subjects, I take it? eom

[winter is coming]

3. This thread is useless without maps. n/t

[Enrique]

13. heh

[burnodo]

4. Why shouldn't Morales plane have refueled in Lisbon?

Why would they need to deny a refueling stop? When are they going to explain what "unspecified technical reasons" means?

[flamingdem]

20. That could be anything like scheduling, they had two days to reroute and did not nt

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

6. Stop the presses, flamingdem has the scoop!

Sorry, technical reasons sounds like BS to me, especially when you take into account all the other countries this plane had issues with.

[flamingdem]

7. 2. Evogate False Claim: Spain denied use of its airspace, refueling and insisted on inspection

In a midnight press conference:


An official with Spain's foreign ministry said Wednesday that the country on Tuesday authorized Morales' plane to fly within its airspace and to make a refueling stop. The official said Bolivia asked again this morning for permission and got it.
The refueling stop was apparently in the Canary Islands, a stop which occurred Wednesday afternoon. The Guardian offers more clarity.

Spain, where Morales's plane is due to refuel during its current journey, denied Bolivian claims that it only agreed to allow the plane to refuel in the Canaries if Bolivian authorities allowed it to be inspected. The foreign minister said this was not the case. The prime minister, Mariano Rajoy, said authorisation was given for the refuelling stop but that it was important that Snowden was not aboard. (Without the context of the question it's not possible to know what he meant here).

Bolivia: "The ambassador for Spain in Austria has just informed us that there is no authorisation to fly over Spanish territory and that at 9am Wednesday they would be in contact with us again," the Bolivian defence minister, Ruben Saavedra, said. ** Here Saavedra implies there is an issue with Spain rather than a simple agreement to call at 9am

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

[Warren Stupidity]

8. You all have officially lost your collective minds in your determination to deny reality.

[morningfog]

12. The alternative is just too damn painful!

[flamingdem]

36. The only pain for me is disinformation and you'll see there was blatant information to build Evogate

Such as pretending that Ambassador Eacho was involved.

If that's being reported you have to wonder about the rest.

Especially the Guardian, their reporting was atrocious and left out key facts to build a poutrage narrative

[bemildred]

9. Must be some sort of conspiracy. nt

[flamingdem]

21. Read Post #14 for DISINFORMATION planted in a story about US Ambassador Eacho calling Austrians

Pure fabrication and this is the only reference you'll see to this lie.

[bemildred]

28. Yes, I know, it's just outrageous how people will make things up. nt

[flamingdem]

10. 3. Evogate False Claim: Bolivian Plane flatly refused authorization to fly over France

Last edited Thu Jul 4, 2013, 03:28 PM - Edit history (1)

** This is the least well explained. More details needed as to what happened and when. Two ministry officials said it was not denied access and then an apology was given citing conflicting information and not knowing it was Morales plane


Today, France and Spain disputed Choquehuanca's claims, as reported by the AP.

Two officials with the French Foreign Ministry said Wednesday that Morales' plane had authorization to fly over France. They would not comment on why Bolivian officials said otherwise. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to be publicly named according to ministry policy.

France has apologized to Bolivia for closing its airspace to President Evo Morales, blaming the incident on “conflicting information” about the plane’s passengers.

ster called his Bolivian counterpart to tell him about France's regrets after the incident caused by the late confirmation of permission for President Morales's plane to fly over (French) territory,” said ministry spokesman Philippe Lalliot.
- See more at: http://therebel.org/europe/663229-france-apologizes-over-bolivia-jet-row#sthash.wFKgmZyj.dpuf

[ljm2002]

26. Did you even read your own excerpt?

France has apologized to Bolivia for closing its airspace to President Evo Morales

[flamingdem]

32. I'd say this is the least well explained

but I would expect incompetence more than a real concern that Snowden was on the plane.

See the last claim: Snowden was on the plane, unlikely since it took off from an airport 20 odd miles from Snowden's location

[ljm2002]

43. I responded to a post of yours...

...entitled: "Evogate False Claim: Bolivian Plane refused authorization to fly over France"

Your response included an excerpt stating that France has apologized for closing its airspace to President Evo Morales.

And now you are talking about incompetence vs. a real concern about Snowden being on the plane.

Nice deflection.

[flamingdem]

47. Because the information and context of the statements is unclear

As of now there is nothing clear about countries believing Snowden was on the plane or an admission of what they thought their role would be

[ljm2002]

50. All of which has ZIP to do with...

...your post title, which I will repeat here for reference:

"Evogate False Claim: Bolivian Plane refused authorization to fly over France"

You said there was a false claim regarding the refusal of authorization to fly over France. I disproved that statement. You then pivoted to concerns about whether Snowden was on the plane or what other countries thought... or anything EXCEPT your original false claim, right there in the post title.

[flamingdem]

53. Okay I have revise that one to reflect the vague

description of events.

In case France really wanted to kick Snowden's ass color me surprised. More likely incompetence

[PoliticAverse]

39. "France has apologized to Bolivia for closing its airspace to President Evo Morales"

Just to echo your point.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

11. Develop theories to your heart's content. We still have a continent pissed about it.

[flamingdem]

23. That was the point of the Bolivian exaggeration, that plus incompetence

They had time to reroute and did not. They haven't explained that just that the Bolivian pilots didn't want to.
It's those pilots that put Morales "life in danger".

Do you think the Bolivians can back off now they had a public shit fit? No, so they'll go with it for populist purposes.

[flamingdem]

14. 4. Evogate False Claim: US Ambassador intervened, Austria held Morales "captive" + searched plane

The claim: US Ambassador William Eacho intervened in the Austria layover demanding Snowden's release

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 embassador 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

The claim: The plane was held hostage in Vienna

Morales and his entourage had just concluded diplomatic meetings in ... peanuts all while “being held hostage” according to Morales himself.


The claim: The plane was searched against the Bolivians wishes

Once the plane was on the ground, members of the airport police force walked through the plane, according to a reporter who spoke with the Guardian's Glenn Greenwald. According to The New York Times, permission to do so was granted by the Bolivians. (Routine inspection not a search).


http://www.elections.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/03/1220938/-Diplomatic-Affront-Says-Latin-America-Bolivian-Presidential-Plane-Held-Captive-for-13-Hours

[Enrique]

15. you all need to start working on your pivot

when you go from denying it to saying it's no big deal. It seems that will be coming soon.

[DirkGently]

17. Got to wring everything they can out of obfuscation first, apparently.

[Fumesucker]

18. We've known all about this since 2006 or 1996 or 1776 or something

[JimDandy]

35. LOL!

[Savannahmann]

16. Oh for the sake of...

You want facts? OK, here we go.

Federal Aviation Regulations (Part 91) Concerning Fuel. http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=3efaad1b0a259d4e48f1150a34d1aa77&rgn=div5&view=text&node=14:2.0.1.3.10&idno=14#14:2.0.1.3.10.2.6.38

§ 91.167 Fuel requirements for flight in IFR conditions.

(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft in IFR conditions unless it carries enough fuel (considering weather reports and forecasts and weather conditions) to—

(1) Complete the flight to the first airport of intended landing;

(2) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, fly from that airport to the alternate airport; and

(3) Fly after that for 45 minutes at normal cruising speed or, for helicopters, fly after that for 30 minutes at normal cruising speed.

(b) Paragraph (a)(2) of this section does not apply if:

(1) Part 97 of this chapter prescribes a standard instrument approach procedure to, or a special instrument approach procedure has been issued by the Administrator to the operator for, the first airport of intended landing; and

(2) Appropriate weather reports or weather forecasts, or a combination of them, indicate the following:

(i) For aircraft other than helicopters. For at least 1 hour before and for 1 hour after the estimated time of arrival, the ceiling will be at least 2,000 feet above the airport elevation and the visibility will be at least 3 statute miles.

(ii) For helicopters. At the estimated time of arrival and for 1 hour after the estimated time of arrival, the ceiling will be at least 1,000 feet above the airport elevation, or at least 400 feet above the lowest applicable approach minima, whichever is higher, and the visibility will be at least 2 statute miles.

[Doc. No. 98-4390, 65 FR 3546, Jan. 21, 2000]


The international standards are pretty much the same.

So according to you, President Morales, and the military pilot that is assigned to fly his plane, probably the best pilot in all of Bolivia, took off, apparently without a flight plan, since it is impossible to get an international flight plan, or clearances to depart internationally, without showing where fuel stops would be. His jet A Dessault Falcon 900 EX has a range of 4,500 miles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Falcon_900#Variants

Now, they've had a problem in Bolivia getting a pilot rated for that aircraft. http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hmBYUm8BTaUNfhqLH36vkXm0SG5A

Which means they probably hired a flight crew, including the pilots rated with the insurance company for overwater flights, international flights, and who was able to survive the security checks.

Now, this pilot, with all that experience, rated in a fairly rare variant of the plane, was so inept he couldn't tell where his planes range was, and therefore committed a violation of international flight rules, risking losing his license, and his life, by flying off that a way like it was the days of the barnstormers.

Or, he filed a false flight plan, which again gets his license revoked, blackballs him with the insurance company, and commits several violations of international agreement.

Or, he had a properly filled out flight plan, with acceptance by the airports in question before he departed. There is an approval number issued. That number is what will save his license or doom him to the worst fate for a pilot, grounding for life.

In your scenario, pilots just take off whenever they want, headed in whatever direction they want, and then as they get low on gas, start looking out the window and watching highway signs for gas stations. That is by the way, absolutely insane.

[flamingdem]

44. Refer to the Original Post about Portugal. They said it was a two day discussion that Bolivia

did not resolve it. That's beyond both of us to understand and is probably incompetence or lack of resources related.

[Savannahmann]

52. You still don't get it.

The plane could not have taken off without a fueling stop authorized by the flight plan. Now, you're unwillingness to accept this is bordering on obtuse at this point.

Portugal's airport got the request for a fueling stop, they did not deny it. They approved it. Or there would not have been an authorized flight plan. Do you think that nations in Europe allow planes to fly here and there and cross international borders without clearances? Those clearances were canceled in the air, in violation of numerous international agreements. Again, we know this because it would never have taken off without an authorized flight plan.

One of the last things the controller says before giving permission to take off is the status of the flight plan. It sounds something like this. "FAB-001 you are cleared direct to (Insert name of next stop here) via route (international or national airway route number) at 35,000 feet. (Or meters). Wind 260 at 8, altimeter is 2990 (Meaning 29.90).

Then the plane moves to the active runway, after being cleared to go on to the active. Runs up his engines, final checks, and then is cleared for takeoff. As he leaves the airports airspace, he is told to switch radio channels to departure frequency, then he's told to switch to center control, then when he leaves each airspace, he's told to contact each subsequent center, until he reaches his destination, when he's told to contact approach, then tower, then after landing, ground controllers who tell him where to go park, and how to get there. (Proceed to transient aircraft ramp via taxiway 28." If there is confusion you may hear. "Follow the follow me truck" Which is a car painted garish colors with flags and the words Follow Me on the back.

If his flight plan had not been approved, Russian controllers would not have given him permission to get on the active runway, much less depart. These days, nobody takes off without a flight plan If you leave the route, the center controller starts to ask you questions and direct you back on the route. If you do take off without a clearance, angry men or women in big scary planes called fighters end up off your wing with white missiles on the rails, that means live missiles, and you are instructed to land immediately or risk being shot down.

In your scenario, that is what happened, except big scary fighters didn't show up, Portugal says that they didn't know he was actually coming until he was over Austria. Impossible.

I sincerely hope Portugal doesn't have anything too valuable in Bolivia, because one will get you twenty that it's nationalized in about sixty days.

[flamingdem]

54. What Portugal said on the matter says they didn't give permission. Yes, if this is truly a problem

there will be consequences like a withdrawn ambassador.

What I think you're missing is that they were in disagreement about the refueling and there might have been a permission, a withdrawn permission, miscommunication.

I doubt we will see any repercussions, if there are let me know please and I'll do the same.

[flamingdem]

19. 5. The Claim: US presents Bolivia with an extradition request for Edward Snowden

Claim: U.S. Government has presented Bolivia with an extradition request for the former CIA anylist Edward Snowden, according to Bolivia's Minister of Foreign Affairs

According Foreign Minister Choquehuanca this extradition request explains the actions of several European countries when they closed their airspace to the plane of the president of Bolivia, Evo Morales, thinking that Edward Snowden could be on that on the plane.

---

Fact: The U.S. Government sent letters to all countries that are potential asylum targets for Snowden. Not just Bolivia.

http://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/view/99109-eeuu-bolivia-solicitud-extradicion-snowden

[dkf]

31. So they did change their behaviors due to US requests! You just proved it.

So scared of the US that they disregard international protocols regarding treatment of heads of state.

Moreover the non-denials of communication between the US and any of these countries as Morales plane was flying is sure suspicious.

[flamingdem]

34. The letter was very rote as quoted by the Bolivians

On the list only France looks not fully explained and innocent of belief that Snowden was aboard.

[dkf]

40. That is not normal treatment for a head of state and you know it.

Of course they will have their convenient nit picky excuses, like Hong Kong had when they refused to do anything about Snowden thanks to the misprint of his middle name.

The US is going apeshit over Snowden and everyone knows it.

[flamingdem]

45. We don't know exactly what happened. The US is not going "apeshit" they are waiting for their quarry

to run out of options.

[burnodo]

57. We don't know what happened?

You claim with this OP that we DO know what happened.

[Cali_Democrat]

22. Hey flamingdem, notice how none of the folks in this thread can dispute any of the facts you posted?

And they claim youre the one denying reality.

This is funny as hell

[flamingdem]

24. Hi CD! Yes, the updates are of no interest to those who see gain in poutrage!

I didn't even get into how the Guardian used selective reporting to build a narrative with their live blogging.

Oh, I just thought of another one to add. The USA never would have thought that he was on the plane because it did a stopover in Russia before exiting. I never thought Evo would bother taking the real Snowden with him, the fake one is getting him much more mileage

[Cali_Democrat]

33. LOL...that right. Snowden was in an entirely different airport

Bwhahahahahahahaha!!

[flamingdem]

29. 6. Claim: Ermagod the USA thinks Snowden is on the plane and tried to nab him!

The claim: Snowden could have been on the plane.

This is perhaps the easiest claim to debunk. Morales' plane, The Times notes, departed from Vnukovo Airport, which is 27 miles away and on the opposite side of Moscow from Sheremetyevo Airport where Snowden is currently living.

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

woo hoo!

[PoliticAverse]

41. Because it's physically impossible to travel 27 miles by, say, car ?? n/t

[flamingdem]

46. That would mean Putin approved and he's not looking for those kinds of problems

The Russians would have had to supply transportation and would have had to release him, all documented

[PoliticAverse]

48. Yes because everything governments do is always 'all documented'. n/t

[flamingdem]

49. Well they know that no one would believe it if he left without that

because he's under observation at the Novatel, basically in jail

[graham4anything]

51. +1 K&R nt. Solid debunking.

[flamingdem]

55. Why thank you for the compliment!

And Happy 4th of July grahm4anything!!

[graham4anything]

56. Happy 4th of July! nt.

[idwiyo]

58. Have a link to the map of Lisbon handy?

[Scurrilous]

59. K & R

[Savannahmann]

60. It took a while but I think I've finally gotten your point.

I think I'm starting to get your point. The point is that those Brown people can't be trusted to tell the truth, and they get too excited too quickly over the slightest misunderstanding. Is that the point? Because it sure looks like it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. So in short, brown people who do not speak english

are trying to be manipulative sons of %%&%%& even though those same white upstanding European governments have apologized for what actually happened?

Did I get it right?

I never thought you would sink to that level.

It is time to send you where you belong, the ignore list.

[freshwest]

64. Meh, the media just regurgitated more puke. I'm so impressed by the dazzling bullshit. *not*