What Belarus did, while illegal, is not unprecedented. The dangerous tactic was pioneered by the same U.S. and E.U. officials now righteously condemning it.
The "liberal international order" in action. It is also worth pointing out that the "journalists" frantically clutching their pearls about the treatment of Protasevich have absolutely nothing to say about the persecution of Julian Assange who has been rotting away in a UK dungeon for years.
Forgive me for not having read this piece before commenting. However, I for some time wanted to express my appreciation for the service to our country Glenn performed in bringing the Snowden evidence to light.
I bought into the MSM spin on Snowden when the story first broke and had a dim view of Edward. However, after the events of the Russia Russia Russia hoax and the complicity of law enforcement/intel community/MSM at the highest level, my mind was opened. Then I listened to the Joe Rogan podcast with Glenn and heard Edwards's side of the story.
Thank you Glenn, but more than that, Thank you Mr. Snowden. You have done a great service to those of us who love our Rights and Freedoms.
They all do. I could give you dozens of names, and there are still more criminals we may never know. However, the corrupt abuses of the FISA process and other intel operations lays bare the reality Mr. Snowden tried to warn us about years ago.
My hypocrisy meter has been pinned since Obama droned Anwar al-Awlaki, a US citizen and was given a pass, meanwhile Bush II was figuratively keel hauled for denying habeas corpus to non US citizen prisoners .
That was one of several incidents that dramatically changed my view of Democrats, and liberals in general. Obama also killed Anwar al-Awlaki's 16 year old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen. The Obama team put the blame on the fact that the boy had an irresponsible father - a truly sociopathic statement.
There's also Obama promising to defend the torturers at the CIA from prosecution, and many other moral atrocities. These elicited little more from his fans than statements that "There were some disappointments."
I so remember the day Morales plane was forced down. I was outraged. I remain outraged that Edward Snowden, an exceptionally gifted US citizen deserving of a hero's welcome in this country, continues in exile. How, concerning the cruel treatment of whistleblowers like Snowden and Assange, is the US government less despotic than that of Belarus?
So much of GG's take on this is incomplete. Firstly, we don't know that the elections in Belarus were a "sham." It's possible, even likely, that a majority of Belarus' electorate voted to retain Luka. Westerners, and urban neoliberal lovers in Minsk think and claim majorities out of Minsk alone when claiming a majority; like the rest of the country doesn't matter. Russia too. United Russia and Vladimir Putin poll something like 45% and 48% in Moscow and St. Petersburg yet poll 65% and up in other metropolitan areas and across vast numbers of small town and rural oblasts. Who says that the elections were a sham, Glenn? The same Westernized opposition that gets funding from American funded NGO's? And Western MSM outlets? These same outlets say all kinds of things about you Glenn, and like the things they say about Russia, China and Belarus they make claims without evidence. Like you're unhinged. And so on.
Next, it's not just a matter of the Morales precedent, which you cover well. In the 1950's France diverted a civil aircraft in order to arrest the future President of Algeria. In 2016 Ukraine forced a Belarus airliner flying from Kiev to Minsk to return under threat of armed intercept so that Ukraine's special services could arrest an ethnic Russian Ukrainian dissident. It turns out he wasn't even onboard but in a case of mistaken identity an Armenian citizen spent the night in an interrogation room. The United States forced the diversion of a jetliner traveling between Mexico and France, bringing it down for a forced and unscheduled landing to effect an arrest. And so on. What Belarus did isn't actually illegal, on the face of it. They covered themselves with a bomb threat causing the crew to ask for diversion to Minsk, the fighter escort was an afterthought and probably directed at outside intervention.
Most importantly, you fail to describe the difference between Snowden and this person detained by Belarus. The individual is involved with Western intelligence agencies and NGO's trying to bring down the government of Belarus, including via civil strife that has injured and killed people. He also worked, in uniform, with the Azov battalion in Eastern Ukraine, a neo-nazi militant group in Ukraine involved in killing in Eastern Ukraine, including targeting civilians in areas outside government control, including Russians holding joint citizenship. Meaning Russian Federation citizens. It's not unlikely that the four men who also didn't rejoin the plane in Belarus when it flew on toward Baltic jurisdictions were Russian GRU agents, as passengers on the plane report them speaking Russian. There may even be a secret arrest warrant for this person in Russia, likely I'd say.
Lastly, there is a world of difference between third party EU states forcing down an aircraft in 2013 at the urging of an outside country and Belarus excersing sovereign authority over an aircraft flying in it's own airspace. Way different, two different things. No state, treaty or not, is going to allow some character, who has participated in civil strife that has claimed property and life, fly in a third party civil aircraft over the country of record where he or she is a wanted citizen, without taking action. This isn't a world made up of unicorns, endless rainbows and teletubbies. This guy isn't just a blogger or journalist, he's a conspiritor to the violent destabilization of his own country in collusion with foreign powers. He sir, is no Edward Snowden.
It's the Imperially minded excuse that an electorate who has issues with their country being looked down on and taken advantage of must be oppressed into electing leaders who stand up for their country rather than selling out to the American neoliberal world order. They can't conceive of a world where people choose Vladimir Putin of their own free will because he has been painted as a bad man by outsiders, so it must be true that he strongarms Russians into supporting him. No other calculations regarding real support is possible (in their feeble minds) so the consent must be manufactured by state authority. These minds have some serious issues in not taking a long look at their own societies and politicos.
I'm impressed that every once in a while you engage with the superior ones, the all-knowing ones, the exceptional ones, former spooks and what not. My experience has shown it's hopeless - they're impervious to anything that does not match their innate Übermensch complex. The lack of humility and self-reflection is astounding.
I actually don't care who he is, or who anybody is for that matter. I care what somebody says and what they base it on. I only ask to clarify sweeping statements about things that I know about.
Hope you enjoy Almaty -- and no, you're not confused. I think it's funny how the anonymous dude above calls himself russian_bot (like, "Please don't smear me as that!") while he himself groundlessly throws around the "former spooks" smear. But I could tell what his type is: he's the kind who calls for self-reflection in others, but when faced with someone serious, demonstrates that he doesn't live up to the values he himself appeals to.
You and I are talking about different issues. It's very likely true that talking to Russians would indicate they are in favor of Putin. That's a kind of support and consent.
But if it was genuine support and non-manufactured consent, Putin wouldn't have to keep killing journalists and jailing political rivals.
People too easily forget that political leaders around the world artificially increase the public's feelings of support for them. It's done by brutal force and by spreading lies, concealing the leaders' own misdeeds and using their powerful influence over chunks of the media to malign alternatives to their rule and to spread false impressions about their own record. Every country's mainstream political culture has been excessively molded over the decades and centuries by leaders' distortions, so that citizens have grown used to thinking more highly of their leaders than the leaders deserve. There are always some groups of individuals who have managed to see through these distortions more than usual, but these various kinds of groups are usually outside the political mainstream in their country except during occasional periods when the balance shifts dramatically from the biggest leaders to the public. In short, it should be no surprise that the governments of the world could do a lot better than they currently do, in responding to the people's needs and values instead of trying to unjustifiably mold the people's views to the leaders' liking.
There have been some improvements over the centuries in getting governments to respect human rights more and to let the people exercise more power in an autonomous and responsible way, so it's reasonable to think that further improvements are possible. People don't have to be stuck with what, say, Putin does, even if he uses his considerable amount of state power to illegitimately make people think he's the best alternative. But treating political leaders as if they have genuine support from their people, when they really have only manufactured consent and support, is a widespread habit which only makes it harder to get a more just government. Unfortunately many people focus on only a limited menu of bad options, as if the choice was just to listen to Sergei Lavrov vs. the US secretary of state; it's as if someone thought the only way to get news was to watch either CNN or Fox News or Russia Today.
And if you're a malicious anti-democratic politician living in Russia, you'll see that the very obvious move to deceive public opinion is to point to the 1990s and say "Look, this shows how bad democracy is!" That's a contemptible lie, making the post-1989 decade stand for democracy when it was actually far from democracy. But as you mention, the Russian leadership has successfully exploited that lie and has gotten most Russians to interpret the problems of the post-1989 decade not as just Western bullying and corruption, but as if it shows that democracy itself is bad. And of course that has enabled the powerful and the rich in Russia to abuse their position further. I don't see why we should swallow that even if many Russians have been induced to do so.
In general, if a country starts seeing a high rate of journalists being killed, the normal conclusion is that the country's top leader is okay with it unless there is substantial evidence otherwise.
But you still haven't answered my questions. Are you denying that Putin has jailed a well-known political rival? Who are you describing as "paid collaborators", and what are your sources for that?
I'm condescending toward Putin because he deserves it. Are you denying that Putin has jailed a well-known political rival? Who are you describing as "paid collaborators", and what are your sources for that?
Ha, you ask Andreas "are you Belarussian", revealing by your spellings that you aren't Belarusian yourself. If you knew what you were talking about you would spell Belarusian correctly. Andreas isn't Belarusian, but it doesn't say anything good about you when you try to speak critically of somebody just for caring about a country other than his own. What makes a country's ruler rancid is not usually "meddling in affairs of a neighbor" but rather the way the ruler treats his own country's citizens. And serfdom passed its expiration date long ago.
Well thank you for the correction. The point is what does Andreas or Randall Rose care about what goes on in Belarus? I can surely understand that the Belarusians care. But I do not know much about them and I live far away and have no influence. It is an anodyne country. I doubt you have much at stake in that country. I tend to agree with Ricky Miller's point of view.
I see your point of view, although "anodyne" is almost the last word I would use for Lukashenka's government. Serfdom laws and torture happen to bother me in any part of the world. I understand, though, that not everyone feels that way.
Anodyne in the sense that, as a country they have no disputes with anyone, at least not that I am aware of. Serfdom laws and torture? You seem to know more than me. Do you have first hand experience? Or does your information come from people like Roman Protasevich? Most probably your sources are NYT or maybe The New Yorker. I do not like torture myself, even when it is done by Gina Haspel.
Uh Glenn, demanding an airplane flying over a sovereign nation land if it is believed to be carrying a criminal is NOT a criminal act. The only international airspace is over the oceans; airspace over sovereign countries belongs to that nation and flights transiting that airspace are only allowed to do so by permission. The odd thing about this incident is that the dissident, Protasevich, and his girlfriend booked seats on an airliner that would be traveling in Belarusian airspace. Minsk had every right to intercept that airplane and order it to land. By the way, nations don't send up fighters to notify a pilot there may be a bomb on board. They simply notify air traffic control and they notify the pilot. For that matter, military and civilian aircraft communicate on different frequencies. As a retired professional pilot, I see no comparison between this incident and the one with Bolivian officials.
The fighter jet was obviously intended to force the plane to land in Minsk instead of traveling the 30 minutes to its scheduled destination. There are international treaties and conventions governing air space rights to make international air travel safe and effect. There would be immense chaos is countries did this regularly. But I don't understand how one can defend what Belarus did as perfectly appropriate and legal while criticizing what France/Spain/Italy did to the Bolivian plane, given their (false) belief that someone they regarded as a criminal was on board.
Reading the article (and links embedded) will show you that it's far from outside of SOP to deploy such jets to watch a plane with a bomb threat, but the transcript of the pilots' communications with ATC has no mention of any fighter jet. Hence, that's a pure fiction that you've bought into hook, line and sinker.
Glenn, according to the info on Wikipedia (which may or may not be right), the pilot was notified by radio to land because of a bomb threat then a fighter was sent to escort them to Minsk. If that is correct, they were not "forced" to land.
If, as appears likely, the bomb threat was a ruse by the Belarus military/government, then this is the same thing as forcing them to land. It's just accomplished through deceit.
While within certain parameters countries have the right to intercept and redirect airlines flying in their airspace under international law, Belarus likely violated international law by communicating the fake bomb threat. The following is from france24.com (link below):
"As to the fake bomb threat claimed by Belarus as the reason for the interception, Article 1 of the 1970 Montreal Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation (ratified by Belarus) states that "a person commits an offence if he unlawfully and intentionally … communicates information which he knows to be false, thereby endangering the safety of an aircraft in flight". Under Article 10 of the Montreal Convention, a state must take ‘all practicable measures’ to prevent the commission of this and other acts. If, in spite of this, the offence is committed, the state must "facilitate the continuation of the journey of the passengers and crew as soon as practicable". So under this provision Protasevich should be allowed to proceed to Vilnius."
Escort by a fighter jet because of a (fabricated) bomb threat conveys a very real threat of force. The message is that if your flight does not comply, the fighter might shoot you down.
Allow me to re-post a comment from a website with MUCH better sit-reps for both the Middle East and Eastern Europe than can be expected here.
WAS THIS A WESTERN FALSE-FLAG OPERATION?
The reporting in Western media is a total fabrication. Even English language Russian media like RT and Sputnik have fallen for the trap. The Ryanair plane was not hijacked or intercepted by a MiG fighter. All that actually happened was that the air traffic control in Minsk received an anonymous email containing a bomb threat. (It is unknown whether the ATCs in Athens or Vilnius had received similar mail from the Protonmail address.)
Content of Ryanair aircraft bomb message revealed - belta.by, May 24, 2021
“We, soldiers of Hamas, demand that Israel cease fire in the Gaza Strip. We demand that the European Union stop supporting Israel in this war. We know that participants of the Delfi Economic Forum are returning home aboard flight FR4978. A bomb has been planted on the aircraft. If our demands are not met, the bomb will explode over Vilnius on 23 May.”
Information about the threat was passed on to the Ryanair crew right after the aircraft entered Belarus' airspace and communication was established between a Belarusian air traffic controller and the aircraft. “At that time the crew could use the opportunity and return to Lvov, Kiev, could land in Warsaw, continue the flight to Vilnius and so on. At 12:34 the air traffic controller suggested the Minsk National Airport where all the necessary equipment for landing aircraft in complicated meteorological conditions is available as well as a runway as long as 3,600 meters. The crew asked to clarify sources of the tip about the bomb several times. The crew was told the initial message had been sent to the Minsk National Airport. Prior to that the flight operations director of the Minsk area center had tried to call Ryanair's representative office in Lithuania several times but he failed to reach any representative of the air carrier,” Artyom Sikorsky said.
After the email was received everything happened exactly according to international norms and standards. It was the decision of the Ryanair captain alone to turn back and land in Minsk.
Who sent the email?
As I said in my comment right after my first post, I suspect this was a Western false-flag operation. All I am actually seeing in this is a gigantic narrative management operation by Americans and their proxies. They have dictated the narrative even before Belarus knew what happened.
I am starting to think the "forced landing" was a hoax and the whole incident just another Western provocation. Belarusians claim that the decision to diver to Minsk was made by the Ryan Air captain, after he somehow received information about a bomb threat. Sending a fighter jet to escort a hijacked plane or one with a bomb onboard is standard operating procedure after 9/11.
It is Roman Protasevich, who claims he is facing a death penalty in Belarus. Unless he was supposed to be the hit man in the plot to assassinate Lukashenko, the claim is unlikely to be true. Maybe he was ready to spend a few years in prison "for the cause", just like Navalny was
The three reasons that make me believe the hoax email was sent by Western intelligence services and not by Belarus.
Qui bono?
Modus operandi
Massive narrative management operation
It is premature to congratulate Lukashenko for a well-executed revenge. The costs are likely to far outstrip any benefits that Roman Protasevich might bring. Actually he may soon be flying to Vilnius or Warsaw.
Even Bellingcat noted that the plan follows exactly the script set up by Ukrainian SBU in 2020. But it goes far beyond that. Edward Snowden said the primary reason that made him defect was his repulsion at how the CIA abused its foreign assets. First they used them but at any moment they could be thrown under the bus. There is a long but unproven trail of this happening from Politkovskaya to Litvinenko to Skripal to Navalny. Protasevich's Nazi past makes him a prime candidate for dumping.
Belarus may not even have known that Roman Protasevich was onboard unless his pall Franak Viačorka had not tweeted that "Belarus has seized a plane" and Roman is "facing the death penalty." Vital for narrative management, but may have cost Protasevich his freedom.
Posted by: Petri Krohn | May 26 2021 18:11 utc | 6
"Cui bono?" you ask. A flight was redirected to Minsk allowing Belarusian authorities to arrest a dissident who was otherwise out of their reach. I'd start there.
The problem with the "western false flag" hypo is the part where Belarus walks right into the trap and arrests Protasevich. How did the west persuade them to do that?
It seems pretty clear that the bomb threat was a ploy to get the airliner to land in Belarus so they could take their political foe and is girlfriend prisoner.
Nothing to see here, though. Move along. The USA under Obama backed neo-Nazi murderers in the Ukraine too. Glad to see that Glenn has attracted so many neocons/neolibs and red scare baiters. Substack is profitable!
Ironically yeah. Such irony that I paid a small price that is easily cancelable to make a correction to the record. Do you work for Bellingcat? Just curious. If not (formally) you might inquire about an internship.
Yeah, $5/month really breaks me. I'm sure it does for several of you morons, but to me it's literally the transaction fee for a day trade or crypto spot trade.
But be sure to get back to me/us when you finally understand the actual context of the situation and the normality with which Ryanair (and other trans-Euro flights) are FORCIBLY grounded (which this one wasn't). I'm not going to repeat my other posts/replies to those who don't (and fail to intentionally) understand the situation, so please read those before responding.
Your statement that Danauskas is a Nazi or neo-Nazi is inaccurate and suggests that you are promoting propaganda. I am going to view your other comments with high scrutiny.
You got a problem with me fleabag? Any issue with something I've posted/linked? If so say it, otherwise admit you're not here for the truth, just more mindless bullshit.
And you're all willfully ignorant in assuming that the Western MSM is telling the truth about a so-called intercept. Read the transcripts of the Ryanair communication with ATC. Absolutely no mention of "forced landing" or any fighter jet sightings.
Read this one for a good laugh. The headline and other links within claim that there was a Mig 29, but the transcripts completely fail to mention any such thing.
"Belarus also says it dispatched a fighter jet to escort the plane to Minsk only after it agreed to land in Minsk. That remains to be seen and contradicts earlier reports.
While this transcript is not conclusive, it is at least worth exploring. Many unanswered questions remain."
So even IF there was a fighter dispatched to escort the plane to safety, it was only AFTER the Ryanair pilots had already decided to take the bomb threat(s) seriously and divert.
Maybe you need to do some more critical reading/thinking just like Glenn.
"Belarus also says it dispatched a fighter jet to escort the plane to Minsk only after it agreed to land in Minsk. That remains to be seen and contradicts earlier reports.
Sure, but it dispatched the same jet to issue a warning. Then, when the pilot agreed, it became an "escort".
Good point, you should bring that up to the OP who was suggesting that countries can force down any aircraft traveling through their airspace. I think his name was Sam McGowan.
There's absolutely no proof or confirmation from Belarus that this "forced landing" was anything other than a choice by the Ryanair pilots. The transcripts of the communication with ATC contain zero mention of any fighter jet, so even if one was sent up to *watch* the commercial flight, it was completely unknown to the pilots. Period. You and Glenn are relying way too heavily on western media/slash/intelligence service talking points.
Hey, clown - Why don't you try to have me banned? That would be a MUCH better use of your time here than continuing to embarrass TF out of YS attempting to rebut what I write when you're such a miserable failure at it lololololol!!!!
Earth to Dipshit. One needn't be a well known "shill" to mistakenly latch/glom onto Western media talking points. Your badge says you're a founding member. Why are you so afraid to comment under your own real name like I and so many others do who aren't afraid of a little scrutiny? Let me guess - next you'll be calling me a Putin puppet, LMFAOOOOO!
This isn't the first time Greenwald has gotten crucial details wrong, albeit not necessarily to his main point, but rather to the geopolitics involved. His post on the Nordstream 2 pipeline contained similar US-UK-NATO propaganda points without realizing it.
Agree about the misinfo. We're swimming in it and Glenn Greenwald is equally susceptible (especially when linking to the Langley Times or Jeff Bezos' WaPo Blog). In fact it wouldn't surprise me if western intelligence services sent the emailS (there are two) and/or there was no information at the time that Roman was on the plane. A total of 5 passengers de-boarded the plane in Minsk: Protasevich (who has undeniable neo-Nazi ties), his sidekick, and three others who were originally slated to connect at the original destination and end up in Minsk (so they just got off rather than making the extra leg of the trip and back).
They can. Ultimately, though, the pilot of the aircraft chooses to comply or not. If there is no compliance, the sovereign nation chooses to down the aircraft or not.
Wrong. The pilot had no idea there was a jet scrambled and there is flight tracking data as well as a transcript to prove it. The jet wasn't sent up until the pilot had already made the decision to divert and land in Minsk.
The comparison is both planes were forced to land due to a foreign government wanting access to one of their passengers, despite said foreign government not owning the airspace in question (as it is international).
Thank you for the insider view! Do you think the MIG-29 was sent to ensure the air traffic control order from Minsk was followed? The Ryanair flight while still over Belarus was very close to border and Vilnius, even just a few minutes later and the Belarus air traffic control would no longer have the authority.
Probably. As long as the flight was over Belarus, it was subject to the controlling agency no matter how close to the border it was. I don't know all the details but I do know that in many cases, depending on agreements, a diplomatic clearance is required to overfly a country. Apparently, Belarussian intelligence found out that Protasevich was aboard. Why they used a bomb threat to get the flight to land, I don't know. All they had to do was issue a directive by radio.
The danger here is the precedent. Glenn noted two differences between the Belarussian incident and the Italy/France/Spain incident (passenger jet vs. sovereign jet, etc.). There's actually a third, and it's somewhat significant: France/Italy/Spain conveyed their refusal before the jet entered their airspace. If I understand the reporting correctly (and it's quite possible I don't), Belarus explicitly or implicitly conveyed to RyanAir that it could fly through Belarussian airspace, then withdrew that consent mid-flight through deceit and a show of force.
That's not far from simply luring a flight in, revoking your airspace consent, then forcing a landing or taking other drastic action. Very bad precedent.
[Author at Moon of Alabama] The transcript of the radio traffic shows that the pilots, not the authorities in Belarus, made that decision.
Pilot: OK, I give you (unreadable) can you say again IATA code of the airport that authorities have recommended us to divert to?
ATC: RYR 1TZ Standby.
Pilot: Standby, Roger.
ATC :09:41:00: RYR 1TZ .
Pilot: Go ahead.
ATC: IATA code is MSQ.
Pilot: can you say again please?
ATC:IATA code MSQ.
Pilot: MSQ, thanks.
Pilot: 09:41:58: RYR 1TZ Again, this recommendation to divert to Minsk where did it come from? Where did it come from? Company? Did it come from departure airport authorities or arrival airport authorities?
ATC: RYR 1TZ this is our recommendations.
...
Pilot:09:47:12: RYR 1TZ we are declaring an emergency MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY RYR 1TZ. our intentions would be to divert to Minsk airport
ATC: RYR 1TZ MAYDAY, Roger. Standby for vectors.
Pilot: Standby RYR 1TZ.
Pilot: 09:48:10 RYR 1TZ request descent to 10000 feet.
ATC: RYR 1TZ , descend FL100.
Pilot: descend (unreadable) RYR 1TZ.
[Again, author] I am convinced that the radio transcript as presented by the Belorussian air authority is complete and that nothing in it is fake.
Where's the proof that a jet or jets were actually sent up to intercept the commercial flight rather than the Ryanair pilots deciding to divert on their own? Glenn takes the MSM's and CIA's word for it....again.
I agree with Glenn that it was illegal. However he missed many other incidents :
In 2004, the United States forced the personal plane of the former First Deputy Minister of Finance of Russia, and later Senator A.P. Vavilov, on the route Moscow-Barbados-Aspen, to land at Palm Beach Airport. He was then interrogated for several hours.
In 2012, Turkey used fighter jets to down a Moscow-to-Damascus plane, then searched the aircraft and seized its cargo.
Belarusian airliners also became objects of forced landings. In 2016, the Belavia plane, which took off from the Kiev airport, 50 km before entering the Belarusian airspace, was forced, at the request of the Ukrainian dispatcher, who threatened to scramble, combat fighters, if it refused to return to the departure airport to remove the Anti-Maidan activist A. Martirosyan.
Focusing on the plusses and minuses of nations attempting to force planes out the air because someone they don't like is on board is not the issue. The more dissident voices we have the better. Snowden performed a public service at great risk to himself and he should be applauded for that; perhaps a Nobel prize. The machinations of the US to control free speech and to demonize and punish important whistle blowers is the issue. How about cutting out the tongues of people to silence them when they say stuff we don't like? Today the world is becoming more dangerous and fascistic--US included. It's getting scarier by the day.
"How about cutting out the tongues of people to silence them when they say stuff we don't like?"
Slow down, you might give them ideas if you aren't careful what you say!
It says a lot about the political climate today that when I got to reading that sentence, I had to do a double take for a second, since that doesn't sound like as much of a rhetorical question as it would have years ago!
"Just when you thought you couldn't possibly be more cynical about our government's behaviour, you find out that in reality, you haven't been cynical enough."
It's worse than Glenn describes, of course. By international law and treaty, passengers traveling from (e.g.) Auckland to London who landed at LAX for refueling were never officially on US soil nor under US jurisdiction. They were escorted from their aircraft to a holding lounge with toilet and snack facilities while the aircraft was cleaned, re-stocked and re-fueled.
The US unilaterally abrogated all these arrangements in their maniacal global war on tourism after 9/11, and fairly much every nation in the world has followed her idiotic example ever since.
In the immediate aftermath of 9/11 it was actually briefly worse than it is now, only because before all these arrangements had been formally re-arranged, the US government took it upon themselves to assault every transit passengers using their airports for transit and refueling purposes.
I flew on a military charter through Budapest in December 2007. We had taken off from Norfolk and were flying to Qatar, so Budapest was a refueling stop apparently. I say that mainly because we'd been in the air for 9 hours or whatever and there were a ton of smokers on board (soldiers...) and none of them could even get off for a smoke. Another 5 hours or so to Qatar and everyone lit up simultaneously.
Why Obama allowed China Biden to supervise the anti-corruption movement in Ukraine while China Biden's son sat at the Board of a corrupted natural gas company?
Why Obama is so scared of Snowden?
Why Obama can pocket millions dollars of royalty from book sales when many experienced publishers commented that it does not make too much business sense for the UNBELIEVABLE HUGE royalty payment?
The answer is BARRACK OBAMA IS/WAS THE MOST CORRUPTED EX-PRESIDENT / PRESEIDENT IN AMERICA HISTORY. Barrack Obama is willing to do UGLY DEEDS for anyone if you pay him enough $$$$$$.
The "liberal international order" in action. It is also worth pointing out that the "journalists" frantically clutching their pearls about the treatment of Protasevich have absolutely nothing to say about the persecution of Julian Assange who has been rotting away in a UK dungeon for years.
Propaganda by omission is a commonly used and effective technique.
Forgive me for not having read this piece before commenting. However, I for some time wanted to express my appreciation for the service to our country Glenn performed in bringing the Snowden evidence to light.
I bought into the MSM spin on Snowden when the story first broke and had a dim view of Edward. However, after the events of the Russia Russia Russia hoax and the complicity of law enforcement/intel community/MSM at the highest level, my mind was opened. Then I listened to the Joe Rogan podcast with Glenn and heard Edwards's side of the story.
Thank you Glenn, but more than that, Thank you Mr. Snowden. You have done a great service to those of us who love our Rights and Freedoms.
You are 100% spot on. And yes, Brennan belongs in jail. So does Clapper and Hayden.
They all do. I could give you dozens of names, and there are still more criminals we may never know. However, the corrupt abuses of the FISA process and other intel operations lays bare the reality Mr. Snowden tried to warn us about years ago.
And it's STILL GOING ON!!
My hypocrisy meter has been pinned since Obama droned Anwar al-Awlaki, a US citizen and was given a pass, meanwhile Bush II was figuratively keel hauled for denying habeas corpus to non US citizen prisoners .
That was one of several incidents that dramatically changed my view of Democrats, and liberals in general. Obama also killed Anwar al-Awlaki's 16 year old son, Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, a U.S. citizen. The Obama team put the blame on the fact that the boy had an irresponsible father - a truly sociopathic statement.
There's also Obama promising to defend the torturers at the CIA from prosecution, and many other moral atrocities. These elicited little more from his fans than statements that "There were some disappointments."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdulrahman_al-Awlaki
I so remember the day Morales plane was forced down. I was outraged. I remain outraged that Edward Snowden, an exceptionally gifted US citizen deserving of a hero's welcome in this country, continues in exile. How, concerning the cruel treatment of whistleblowers like Snowden and Assange, is the US government less despotic than that of Belarus?
So much of GG's take on this is incomplete. Firstly, we don't know that the elections in Belarus were a "sham." It's possible, even likely, that a majority of Belarus' electorate voted to retain Luka. Westerners, and urban neoliberal lovers in Minsk think and claim majorities out of Minsk alone when claiming a majority; like the rest of the country doesn't matter. Russia too. United Russia and Vladimir Putin poll something like 45% and 48% in Moscow and St. Petersburg yet poll 65% and up in other metropolitan areas and across vast numbers of small town and rural oblasts. Who says that the elections were a sham, Glenn? The same Westernized opposition that gets funding from American funded NGO's? And Western MSM outlets? These same outlets say all kinds of things about you Glenn, and like the things they say about Russia, China and Belarus they make claims without evidence. Like you're unhinged. And so on.
Next, it's not just a matter of the Morales precedent, which you cover well. In the 1950's France diverted a civil aircraft in order to arrest the future President of Algeria. In 2016 Ukraine forced a Belarus airliner flying from Kiev to Minsk to return under threat of armed intercept so that Ukraine's special services could arrest an ethnic Russian Ukrainian dissident. It turns out he wasn't even onboard but in a case of mistaken identity an Armenian citizen spent the night in an interrogation room. The United States forced the diversion of a jetliner traveling between Mexico and France, bringing it down for a forced and unscheduled landing to effect an arrest. And so on. What Belarus did isn't actually illegal, on the face of it. They covered themselves with a bomb threat causing the crew to ask for diversion to Minsk, the fighter escort was an afterthought and probably directed at outside intervention.
Most importantly, you fail to describe the difference between Snowden and this person detained by Belarus. The individual is involved with Western intelligence agencies and NGO's trying to bring down the government of Belarus, including via civil strife that has injured and killed people. He also worked, in uniform, with the Azov battalion in Eastern Ukraine, a neo-nazi militant group in Ukraine involved in killing in Eastern Ukraine, including targeting civilians in areas outside government control, including Russians holding joint citizenship. Meaning Russian Federation citizens. It's not unlikely that the four men who also didn't rejoin the plane in Belarus when it flew on toward Baltic jurisdictions were Russian GRU agents, as passengers on the plane report them speaking Russian. There may even be a secret arrest warrant for this person in Russia, likely I'd say.
Lastly, there is a world of difference between third party EU states forcing down an aircraft in 2013 at the urging of an outside country and Belarus excersing sovereign authority over an aircraft flying in it's own airspace. Way different, two different things. No state, treaty or not, is going to allow some character, who has participated in civil strife that has claimed property and life, fly in a third party civil aircraft over the country of record where he or she is a wanted citizen, without taking action. This isn't a world made up of unicorns, endless rainbows and teletubbies. This guy isn't just a blogger or journalist, he's a conspiritor to the violent destabilization of his own country in collusion with foreign powers. He sir, is no Edward Snowden.
Holy shit your critical thinking skills are in shambles.
Since when is manufactured consent genuine support?
"manufactured consent" - what is it?
It's the Imperially minded excuse that an electorate who has issues with their country being looked down on and taken advantage of must be oppressed into electing leaders who stand up for their country rather than selling out to the American neoliberal world order. They can't conceive of a world where people choose Vladimir Putin of their own free will because he has been painted as a bad man by outsiders, so it must be true that he strongarms Russians into supporting him. No other calculations regarding real support is possible (in their feeble minds) so the consent must be manufactured by state authority. These minds have some serious issues in not taking a long look at their own societies and politicos.
I'm impressed that every once in a while you engage with the superior ones, the all-knowing ones, the exceptional ones, former spooks and what not. My experience has shown it's hopeless - they're impervious to anything that does not match their innate Übermensch complex. The lack of humility and self-reflection is astounding.
I actually don't care who he is, or who anybody is for that matter. I care what somebody says and what they base it on. I only ask to clarify sweeping statements about things that I know about.
Hope you enjoy Almaty -- and no, you're not confused. I think it's funny how the anonymous dude above calls himself russian_bot (like, "Please don't smear me as that!") while he himself groundlessly throws around the "former spooks" smear. But I could tell what his type is: he's the kind who calls for self-reflection in others, but when faced with someone serious, demonstrates that he doesn't live up to the values he himself appeals to.
You and I are talking about different issues. It's very likely true that talking to Russians would indicate they are in favor of Putin. That's a kind of support and consent.
But if it was genuine support and non-manufactured consent, Putin wouldn't have to keep killing journalists and jailing political rivals.
People too easily forget that political leaders around the world artificially increase the public's feelings of support for them. It's done by brutal force and by spreading lies, concealing the leaders' own misdeeds and using their powerful influence over chunks of the media to malign alternatives to their rule and to spread false impressions about their own record. Every country's mainstream political culture has been excessively molded over the decades and centuries by leaders' distortions, so that citizens have grown used to thinking more highly of their leaders than the leaders deserve. There are always some groups of individuals who have managed to see through these distortions more than usual, but these various kinds of groups are usually outside the political mainstream in their country except during occasional periods when the balance shifts dramatically from the biggest leaders to the public. In short, it should be no surprise that the governments of the world could do a lot better than they currently do, in responding to the people's needs and values instead of trying to unjustifiably mold the people's views to the leaders' liking.
There have been some improvements over the centuries in getting governments to respect human rights more and to let the people exercise more power in an autonomous and responsible way, so it's reasonable to think that further improvements are possible. People don't have to be stuck with what, say, Putin does, even if he uses his considerable amount of state power to illegitimately make people think he's the best alternative. But treating political leaders as if they have genuine support from their people, when they really have only manufactured consent and support, is a widespread habit which only makes it harder to get a more just government. Unfortunately many people focus on only a limited menu of bad options, as if the choice was just to listen to Sergei Lavrov vs. the US secretary of state; it's as if someone thought the only way to get news was to watch either CNN or Fox News or Russia Today.
And if you're a malicious anti-democratic politician living in Russia, you'll see that the very obvious move to deceive public opinion is to point to the 1990s and say "Look, this shows how bad democracy is!" That's a contemptible lie, making the post-1989 decade stand for democracy when it was actually far from democracy. But as you mention, the Russian leadership has successfully exploited that lie and has gotten most Russians to interpret the problems of the post-1989 decade not as just Western bullying and corruption, but as if it shows that democracy itself is bad. And of course that has enabled the powerful and the rich in Russia to abuse their position further. I don't see why we should swallow that even if many Russians have been induced to do so.
"Putin wouldn't have to keep killing journalists and jailing political rivals." - sources? Western media and governments? Paid collaborators?
The condescending tone of your screed is what I call the superiority complex. The implicit supremacy permeates the narrative.
Not sure why you're asking for sources for something this well-known, but here are a few:
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/russia-jails-former-mayor-roizman-over-tweets-in-support-of-navalny-101620833115025.html
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2006/12/18/russians-remember-dead-journalists
In general, if a country starts seeing a high rate of journalists being killed, the normal conclusion is that the country's top leader is okay with it unless there is substantial evidence otherwise.
But you still haven't answered my questions. Are you denying that Putin has jailed a well-known political rival? Who are you describing as "paid collaborators", and what are your sources for that?
I'm condescending toward Putin because he deserves it. Are you denying that Putin has jailed a well-known political rival? Who are you describing as "paid collaborators", and what are your sources for that?
Alexander Litvinenko ring a bell?
When is last time Lukashenko meddled in affairs of a neighbor? And are you Belarussian, to care so much about his past due date?
Ha, you ask Andreas "are you Belarussian", revealing by your spellings that you aren't Belarusian yourself. If you knew what you were talking about you would spell Belarusian correctly. Andreas isn't Belarusian, but it doesn't say anything good about you when you try to speak critically of somebody just for caring about a country other than his own. What makes a country's ruler rancid is not usually "meddling in affairs of a neighbor" but rather the way the ruler treats his own country's citizens. And serfdom passed its expiration date long ago.
Well thank you for the correction. The point is what does Andreas or Randall Rose care about what goes on in Belarus? I can surely understand that the Belarusians care. But I do not know much about them and I live far away and have no influence. It is an anodyne country. I doubt you have much at stake in that country. I tend to agree with Ricky Miller's point of view.
I see your point of view, although "anodyne" is almost the last word I would use for Lukashenka's government. Serfdom laws and torture happen to bother me in any part of the world. I understand, though, that not everyone feels that way.
Anodyne in the sense that, as a country they have no disputes with anyone, at least not that I am aware of. Serfdom laws and torture? You seem to know more than me. Do you have first hand experience? Or does your information come from people like Roman Protasevich? Most probably your sources are NYT or maybe The New Yorker. I do not like torture myself, even when it is done by Gina Haspel.
Obama. What a piece of work.
Uh Glenn, demanding an airplane flying over a sovereign nation land if it is believed to be carrying a criminal is NOT a criminal act. The only international airspace is over the oceans; airspace over sovereign countries belongs to that nation and flights transiting that airspace are only allowed to do so by permission. The odd thing about this incident is that the dissident, Protasevich, and his girlfriend booked seats on an airliner that would be traveling in Belarusian airspace. Minsk had every right to intercept that airplane and order it to land. By the way, nations don't send up fighters to notify a pilot there may be a bomb on board. They simply notify air traffic control and they notify the pilot. For that matter, military and civilian aircraft communicate on different frequencies. As a retired professional pilot, I see no comparison between this incident and the one with Bolivian officials.
The fighter jet was obviously intended to force the plane to land in Minsk instead of traveling the 30 minutes to its scheduled destination. There are international treaties and conventions governing air space rights to make international air travel safe and effect. There would be immense chaos is countries did this regularly. But I don't understand how one can defend what Belarus did as perfectly appropriate and legal while criticizing what France/Spain/Italy did to the Bolivian plane, given their (false) belief that someone they regarded as a criminal was on board.
The fighter jet was not even known about by the pilots of the passenger jet, IF in fact such a jet was sent up to intercept it.
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/05/by-the-book-what-really-happened-with-the-ryanair-flight-in-belarus.html#more
Reading the article (and links embedded) will show you that it's far from outside of SOP to deploy such jets to watch a plane with a bomb threat, but the transcript of the pilots' communications with ATC has no mention of any fighter jet. Hence, that's a pure fiction that you've bought into hook, line and sinker.
Glenn, according to the info on Wikipedia (which may or may not be right), the pilot was notified by radio to land because of a bomb threat then a fighter was sent to escort them to Minsk. If that is correct, they were not "forced" to land.
If, as appears likely, the bomb threat was a ruse by the Belarus military/government, then this is the same thing as forcing them to land. It's just accomplished through deceit.
While within certain parameters countries have the right to intercept and redirect airlines flying in their airspace under international law, Belarus likely violated international law by communicating the fake bomb threat. The following is from france24.com (link below):
"As to the fake bomb threat claimed by Belarus as the reason for the interception, Article 1 of the 1970 Montreal Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation (ratified by Belarus) states that "a person commits an offence if he unlawfully and intentionally … communicates information which he knows to be false, thereby endangering the safety of an aircraft in flight". Under Article 10 of the Montreal Convention, a state must take ‘all practicable measures’ to prevent the commission of this and other acts. If, in spite of this, the offence is committed, the state must "facilitate the continuation of the journey of the passengers and crew as soon as practicable". So under this provision Protasevich should be allowed to proceed to Vilnius."
https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20210524-how-belarus-s-aviation-piracy-broke-international-law
Escort by a fighter jet because of a (fabricated) bomb threat conveys a very real threat of force. The message is that if your flight does not comply, the fighter might shoot you down.
Allow me to re-post a comment from a website with MUCH better sit-reps for both the Middle East and Eastern Europe than can be expected here.
WAS THIS A WESTERN FALSE-FLAG OPERATION?
The reporting in Western media is a total fabrication. Even English language Russian media like RT and Sputnik have fallen for the trap. The Ryanair plane was not hijacked or intercepted by a MiG fighter. All that actually happened was that the air traffic control in Minsk received an anonymous email containing a bomb threat. (It is unknown whether the ATCs in Athens or Vilnius had received similar mail from the Protonmail address.)
Content of Ryanair aircraft bomb message revealed - belta.by, May 24, 2021
“We, soldiers of Hamas, demand that Israel cease fire in the Gaza Strip. We demand that the European Union stop supporting Israel in this war. We know that participants of the Delfi Economic Forum are returning home aboard flight FR4978. A bomb has been planted on the aircraft. If our demands are not met, the bomb will explode over Vilnius on 23 May.”
Information about the threat was passed on to the Ryanair crew right after the aircraft entered Belarus' airspace and communication was established between a Belarusian air traffic controller and the aircraft. “At that time the crew could use the opportunity and return to Lvov, Kiev, could land in Warsaw, continue the flight to Vilnius and so on. At 12:34 the air traffic controller suggested the Minsk National Airport where all the necessary equipment for landing aircraft in complicated meteorological conditions is available as well as a runway as long as 3,600 meters. The crew asked to clarify sources of the tip about the bomb several times. The crew was told the initial message had been sent to the Minsk National Airport. Prior to that the flight operations director of the Minsk area center had tried to call Ryanair's representative office in Lithuania several times but he failed to reach any representative of the air carrier,” Artyom Sikorsky said.
After the email was received everything happened exactly according to international norms and standards. It was the decision of the Ryanair captain alone to turn back and land in Minsk.
Who sent the email?
As I said in my comment right after my first post, I suspect this was a Western false-flag operation. All I am actually seeing in this is a gigantic narrative management operation by Americans and their proxies. They have dictated the narrative even before Belarus knew what happened.
I am starting to think the "forced landing" was a hoax and the whole incident just another Western provocation. Belarusians claim that the decision to diver to Minsk was made by the Ryan Air captain, after he somehow received information about a bomb threat. Sending a fighter jet to escort a hijacked plane or one with a bomb onboard is standard operating procedure after 9/11.
It is Roman Protasevich, who claims he is facing a death penalty in Belarus. Unless he was supposed to be the hit man in the plot to assassinate Lukashenko, the claim is unlikely to be true. Maybe he was ready to spend a few years in prison "for the cause", just like Navalny was
The three reasons that make me believe the hoax email was sent by Western intelligence services and not by Belarus.
Qui bono?
Modus operandi
Massive narrative management operation
It is premature to congratulate Lukashenko for a well-executed revenge. The costs are likely to far outstrip any benefits that Roman Protasevich might bring. Actually he may soon be flying to Vilnius or Warsaw.
Even Bellingcat noted that the plan follows exactly the script set up by Ukrainian SBU in 2020. But it goes far beyond that. Edward Snowden said the primary reason that made him defect was his repulsion at how the CIA abused its foreign assets. First they used them but at any moment they could be thrown under the bus. There is a long but unproven trail of this happening from Politkovskaya to Litvinenko to Skripal to Navalny. Protasevich's Nazi past makes him a prime candidate for dumping.
Belarus may not even have known that Roman Protasevich was onboard unless his pall Franak Viačorka had not tweeted that "Belarus has seized a plane" and Roman is "facing the death penalty." Vital for narrative management, but may have cost Protasevich his freedom.
Posted by: Petri Krohn | May 26 2021 18:11 utc | 6
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/05/roman-protasevich-arrested-in-belarus-is-a-western-government-financed-neo-nazi.html?cid=6a00d8341c640e53ef026bded42ac4200c#comment-6a00d8341c640e53ef026bded42ac4200c
"Cui bono?" you ask. A flight was redirected to Minsk allowing Belarusian authorities to arrest a dissident who was otherwise out of their reach. I'd start there.
The problem with the "western false flag" hypo is the part where Belarus walks right into the trap and arrests Protasevich. How did the west persuade them to do that?
Lukashenko's Revenge (Served Cold) - May 24 2021
Roman Protasevich - Arrested In Belarus - Is A Western Government Financed Neo-Nazi - May 26 2021
By The Book - What Really Happened With The Ryanair Flight In Belarus - May 27 2021
Ryanair Incident - Email Warning Received Before Plane Entered Belorussian Airspace - May 28 2021
How ProtonMail Lost The Public Trust It Needs To Do Business - May 29 2021
'Like An Amoral Infant' - How ProtonMail Contributes To False Media Claims About Belarus - May 30
For real links go here: https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/05/ryanair-bomb-threat-in-belarus-western-media-narrative-disagrees-with-the-facts.html#more
If you have a material disagreement with anything I have said then please point it out and back it up.
It seems pretty clear that the bomb threat was a ploy to get the airliner to land in Belarus so they could take their political foe and is girlfriend prisoner.
You mean the Nazi political foe?
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/05/roman-protasevich-arrested-in-belarus-is-a-western-government-financed-neo-nazi.html#more
Nothing to see here, though. Move along. The USA under Obama backed neo-Nazi murderers in the Ukraine too. Glad to see that Glenn has attracted so many neocons/neolibs and red scare baiters. Substack is profitable!
"Glad to see that Glenn has attracted so many neocons/neolibs and red scare baiters. Substack is profitable!"
Ironically you are paying Greenwald to make that comment.
Ironically yeah. Such irony that I paid a small price that is easily cancelable to make a correction to the record. Do you work for Bellingcat? Just curious. If not (formally) you might inquire about an internship.
Even more glad that you (and Glenn) are willing to defend neo-nazis.
https://www.foiaresearch.net/person/roman-protasevich
https://www.thecanadafiles.com/articles/recently-detained-belarussian-neo-nazi-journalist-pratasevich-served-in-canadian-backed-neo-nazi-azov-battalion
Yeah, $5/month really breaks me. I'm sure it does for several of you morons, but to me it's literally the transaction fee for a day trade or crypto spot trade.
But be sure to get back to me/us when you finally understand the actual context of the situation and the normality with which Ryanair (and other trans-Euro flights) are FORCIBLY grounded (which this one wasn't). I'm not going to repeat my other posts/replies to those who don't (and fail to intentionally) understand the situation, so please read those before responding.
Your statement that Danauskas is a Nazi or neo-Nazi is inaccurate and suggests that you are promoting propaganda. I am going to view your other comments with high scrutiny.
Again, more info on the Nazi ties:
https://www.thecanadafiles.com/articles/recently-detained-belarussian-neo-nazi-journalist-pratasevich-served-in-canadian-backed-neo-nazi-azov-battalion
https://www.foiaresearch.net/person/roman-protasevich
I don't think there is any doubt, anywhere, that the Azov Battalion has deep neo-Nazi ties/sympathies:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Battalion
Did you click on the link and view all of the evidence?????
Where is there mention of Danauskas (a Lithuanian)?
Yeah I was just thinking about how every time my plane had to land a fighter jet came and 'escorted' us.
It didn't happen. Sorry. Search every transcript you can find and let me know if there is any mention of a fighter jet "escort" - I'll wait.
Hello, anybody home? McFly?
You got a problem with me fleabag? Any issue with something I've posted/linked? If so say it, otherwise admit you're not here for the truth, just more mindless bullshit.
It’s fairly obvious that threat was a fake excuse. How can people not see through such obvious lies?
They are willfully ignorant or complete morons. Shocking there are so many of them.
And you're all willfully ignorant in assuming that the Western MSM is telling the truth about a so-called intercept. Read the transcripts of the Ryanair communication with ATC. Absolutely no mention of "forced landing" or any fighter jet sightings.
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/you-have-bomb-onboard-belarus-suggested-diverted-ryanair-flight-to-land-in-minsk-101621949017650.html
Read this one for a good laugh. The headline and other links within claim that there was a Mig 29, but the transcripts completely fail to mention any such thing.
https://samchui.com/2021/05/27/belarus-releases-atc-transcript-of-ryanair-b737-diversion-incident/
Here's another. Find me an actual mention of the Mig in any of the transcripts or story (again, it's prominent in the headline).
https://samchui.com/2021/05/24/ryanair-b737-divert-to-belarus-after-intercepted-by-mig-29-fighter-jet/
Here's another.
https://liveandletsfly.com/fr4978-air-traffic-control/
Their only ironclad statement is as follows.
"Belarus also says it dispatched a fighter jet to escort the plane to Minsk only after it agreed to land in Minsk. That remains to be seen and contradicts earlier reports.
While this transcript is not conclusive, it is at least worth exploring. Many unanswered questions remain."
So even IF there was a fighter dispatched to escort the plane to safety, it was only AFTER the Ryanair pilots had already decided to take the bomb threat(s) seriously and divert.
Maybe you need to do some more critical reading/thinking just like Glenn.
"Belarus also says it dispatched a fighter jet to escort the plane to Minsk only after it agreed to land in Minsk. That remains to be seen and contradicts earlier reports.
Sure, but it dispatched the same jet to issue a warning. Then, when the pilot agreed, it became an "escort".
Pay close attention to how politicians use words.
None of those links are anything Id click but thanks.
Good point, you should bring that up to the OP who was suggesting that countries can force down any aircraft traveling through their airspace. I think his name was Sam McGowan.
There's absolutely no proof or confirmation from Belarus that this "forced landing" was anything other than a choice by the Ryanair pilots. The transcripts of the communication with ATC contain zero mention of any fighter jet, so even if one was sent up to *watch* the commercial flight, it was completely unknown to the pilots. Period. You and Glenn are relying way too heavily on western media/slash/intelligence service talking points.
Glenn has been known as a western media shill, no doubt.
/sarcasm
Hey, clown - Why don't you try to have me banned? That would be a MUCH better use of your time here than continuing to embarrass TF out of YS attempting to rebut what I write when you're such a miserable failure at it lololololol!!!!
Iconoclast is an Iconoloser hahaha LOOL!
Earth to Dipshit. One needn't be a well known "shill" to mistakenly latch/glom onto Western media talking points. Your badge says you're a founding member. Why are you so afraid to comment under your own real name like I and so many others do who aren't afraid of a little scrutiny? Let me guess - next you'll be calling me a Putin puppet, LMFAOOOOO!
I will look into this. You make a fair point. We must always be alert for misinformation.
Here's some further info:
https://www.icao.int/Newsroom/Pages/ICAO-Council-agrees-to-pursue-fact-finding-investigation-into-Belarus-incident.aspx
And from the other side of this dispute:
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202105/1224589.shtml
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/05/like-an-amoral-infant-how-protonmail-contributes-to-false-media-claims-about-belarus.html
https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2021/05/28/more-thoughts-on-belarus/
This isn't the first time Greenwald has gotten crucial details wrong, albeit not necessarily to his main point, but rather to the geopolitics involved. His post on the Nordstream 2 pipeline contained similar US-UK-NATO propaganda points without realizing it.
Agree about the misinfo. We're swimming in it and Glenn Greenwald is equally susceptible (especially when linking to the Langley Times or Jeff Bezos' WaPo Blog). In fact it wouldn't surprise me if western intelligence services sent the emailS (there are two) and/or there was no information at the time that Roman was on the plane. A total of 5 passengers de-boarded the plane in Minsk: Protasevich (who has undeniable neo-Nazi ties), his sidekick, and three others who were originally slated to connect at the original destination and end up in Minsk (so they just got off rather than making the extra leg of the trip and back).
They can. Ultimately, though, the pilot of the aircraft chooses to comply or not. If there is no compliance, the sovereign nation chooses to down the aircraft or not.
Think of KAL 007, for instance.
The plane shot down by the Ukraine?
wink wink
Wrong. The pilot had no idea there was a jet scrambled and there is flight tracking data as well as a transcript to prove it. The jet wasn't sent up until the pilot had already made the decision to divert and land in Minsk.
Why not ask some airline pilots about this. I suggest Petter Hörnfeldt, aka Mentour.
The comparison is both planes were forced to land due to a foreign government wanting access to one of their passengers, despite said foreign government not owning the airspace in question (as it is international).
The airspace over a country is sovereign to that country. There are no international agreements concerning the vertical limits of sovereign airspace.
Agreed but the governments that wanted the passengers in these cases were not at root the countries in question.
Thank you for the insider view! Do you think the MIG-29 was sent to ensure the air traffic control order from Minsk was followed? The Ryanair flight while still over Belarus was very close to border and Vilnius, even just a few minutes later and the Belarus air traffic control would no longer have the authority.
Probably. As long as the flight was over Belarus, it was subject to the controlling agency no matter how close to the border it was. I don't know all the details but I do know that in many cases, depending on agreements, a diplomatic clearance is required to overfly a country. Apparently, Belarussian intelligence found out that Protasevich was aboard. Why they used a bomb threat to get the flight to land, I don't know. All they had to do was issue a directive by radio.
The danger here is the precedent. Glenn noted two differences between the Belarussian incident and the Italy/France/Spain incident (passenger jet vs. sovereign jet, etc.). There's actually a third, and it's somewhat significant: France/Italy/Spain conveyed their refusal before the jet entered their airspace. If I understand the reporting correctly (and it's quite possible I don't), Belarus explicitly or implicitly conveyed to RyanAir that it could fly through Belarussian airspace, then withdrew that consent mid-flight through deceit and a show of force.
That's not far from simply luring a flight in, revoking your airspace consent, then forcing a landing or taking other drastic action. Very bad precedent.
Probably concerned about not being listened to. They wouldn't have actually shot down the plane, not for this guy.
It wouldn’t have been the first time an airliner was shot down around that part of the world.
There was a bomb onboard, after all. Or something.
By rebels in the Ukraine. Lukashenko has more to lose here.
It's unlikely that there was even a fighter interceptor deployed in the first place.
[Author at Moon of Alabama] The transcript of the radio traffic shows that the pilots, not the authorities in Belarus, made that decision.
Pilot: OK, I give you (unreadable) can you say again IATA code of the airport that authorities have recommended us to divert to?
ATC: RYR 1TZ Standby.
Pilot: Standby, Roger.
ATC :09:41:00: RYR 1TZ .
Pilot: Go ahead.
ATC: IATA code is MSQ.
Pilot: can you say again please?
ATC:IATA code MSQ.
Pilot: MSQ, thanks.
Pilot: 09:41:58: RYR 1TZ Again, this recommendation to divert to Minsk where did it come from? Where did it come from? Company? Did it come from departure airport authorities or arrival airport authorities?
ATC: RYR 1TZ this is our recommendations.
...
Pilot:09:47:12: RYR 1TZ we are declaring an emergency MAYDAY, MAYDAY, MAYDAY RYR 1TZ. our intentions would be to divert to Minsk airport
ATC: RYR 1TZ MAYDAY, Roger. Standby for vectors.
Pilot: Standby RYR 1TZ.
Pilot: 09:48:10 RYR 1TZ request descent to 10000 feet.
ATC: RYR 1TZ , descend FL100.
Pilot: descend (unreadable) RYR 1TZ.
[Again, author] I am convinced that the radio transcript as presented by the Belorussian air authority is complete and that nothing in it is fake.
Where's the proof that a jet or jets were actually sent up to intercept the commercial flight rather than the Ryanair pilots deciding to divert on their own? Glenn takes the MSM's and CIA's word for it....again.
He was not a criminal. By your logic, we are all criminals according to China's laws and can be arrested if we fly Emirates.
He is considered to be a criminal by the Minsk government.
And you know that…how?
The hypocrisy is pretty glaring. It seems even the most blatant hypocrisy has been normalized at this point.
I agree with Glenn that it was illegal. However he missed many other incidents :
In 2004, the United States forced the personal plane of the former First Deputy Minister of Finance of Russia, and later Senator A.P. Vavilov, on the route Moscow-Barbados-Aspen, to land at Palm Beach Airport. He was then interrogated for several hours.
In 2012, Turkey used fighter jets to down a Moscow-to-Damascus plane, then searched the aircraft and seized its cargo.
Belarusian airliners also became objects of forced landings. In 2016, the Belavia plane, which took off from the Kiev airport, 50 km before entering the Belarusian airspace, was forced, at the request of the Ukrainian dispatcher, who threatened to scramble, combat fighters, if it refused to return to the departure airport to remove the Anti-Maidan activist A. Martirosyan.
Focusing on the plusses and minuses of nations attempting to force planes out the air because someone they don't like is on board is not the issue. The more dissident voices we have the better. Snowden performed a public service at great risk to himself and he should be applauded for that; perhaps a Nobel prize. The machinations of the US to control free speech and to demonize and punish important whistle blowers is the issue. How about cutting out the tongues of people to silence them when they say stuff we don't like? Today the world is becoming more dangerous and fascistic--US included. It's getting scarier by the day.
"How about cutting out the tongues of people to silence them when they say stuff we don't like?"
Slow down, you might give them ideas if you aren't careful what you say!
It says a lot about the political climate today that when I got to reading that sentence, I had to do a double take for a second, since that doesn't sound like as much of a rhetorical question as it would have years ago!
Psaki. What a hack. Good to point out that this kind of stuff happens and the hypocrisy of western nations whining. Stellar piece Glenn.
She is representing this administration perfectly: shifty, incompetent, arrogant.
You forgot condescending.
Oh, and purposely obtuse.
Yup, that too. Sometimes I really don't get the logic how these positions are handed out.
The characterizations above summarize the job requirements.
You're probably right Andreas. At least it's easy to tell Psaki is full of shit.
“How DARE others do what we, the US/West, do???” <insert sound of pearls being clutched>
The US government is now just as much a banana republic as Belarus so Blinken should STFU.
Great piece, Glenn. Learned alot I didn't know before. This is the stuff I look forward too. Current events with a critical lense and proper context.
Yup. Old school journalism, not just stenography to power.
"Just when you thought you couldn't possibly be more cynical about our government's behaviour, you find out that in reality, you haven't been cynical enough."
--I-don't-remember-who-said-it-it-wasn't-me-but-I-agree.
It's worse than Glenn describes, of course. By international law and treaty, passengers traveling from (e.g.) Auckland to London who landed at LAX for refueling were never officially on US soil nor under US jurisdiction. They were escorted from their aircraft to a holding lounge with toilet and snack facilities while the aircraft was cleaned, re-stocked and re-fueled.
The US unilaterally abrogated all these arrangements in their maniacal global war on tourism after 9/11, and fairly much every nation in the world has followed her idiotic example ever since.
In the immediate aftermath of 9/11 it was actually briefly worse than it is now, only because before all these arrangements had been formally re-arranged, the US government took it upon themselves to assault every transit passengers using their airports for transit and refueling purposes.
But hey - they're special, right?
Their mantra is as it has been for decades now;
"**It's not wrong when we do it!**"
It's not just tourism.
I flew on a military charter through Budapest in December 2007. We had taken off from Norfolk and were flying to Qatar, so Budapest was a refueling stop apparently. I say that mainly because we'd been in the air for 9 hours or whatever and there were a ton of smokers on board (soldiers...) and none of them could even get off for a smoke. Another 5 hours or so to Qatar and everyone lit up simultaneously.
I can only say, OBAMA IS A VERY CORRUPTED PERSON.
Why Obama allowed China Biden to supervise the anti-corruption movement in Ukraine while China Biden's son sat at the Board of a corrupted natural gas company?
Why Obama is so scared of Snowden?
Why Obama can pocket millions dollars of royalty from book sales when many experienced publishers commented that it does not make too much business sense for the UNBELIEVABLE HUGE royalty payment?
The answer is BARRACK OBAMA IS/WAS THE MOST CORRUPTED EX-PRESIDENT / PRESEIDENT IN AMERICA HISTORY. Barrack Obama is willing to do UGLY DEEDS for anyone if you pay him enough $$$$$$.
ASSHOLE BARRACK OBAMA !!!