International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

[oddlots]

Good report on how the Honduran coup leaders have successfully legitimised themselves in the eyes of the international community through outright fraud:

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?...4&jumival=4573

[rj1]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

Good report on how the Honduran coup leaders have successfully legitimised themselves in the eyes of the international community through outright fraud:

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?...4&jumival=4573

I always thought the coup leaders were right. Was once arguing with a guy on another forum who was a member of the British Labour Party saying that it did not matter what the Honduran Constitution said regarding a leader only be allowed one term and the Constitution being poorly written the Honduran Supreme Court should not be following it to remove the President attempting to break national law. :rolleyes:

[oddlots]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

I always thought the coup leaders were right. Was once arguing with a guy on another forum who was a member of the British Labour Party saying that it did not matter what the Honduran Constitution said regarding a leader only be allowed one term and the Constitution being poorly written the Honduran Supreme Court should not be following it to remove the President attempting to break national law. :rolleyes:

I thought this report was worth posting because it was good reporting. It's not often that you can get a government official admit that the statistics he's responsible for tracking make liars of the politicians who are misrepresenting them and then be treated to a panorama of international politicians leaping on this falsified claim in order to back down from a rarely principled position. As I said, epic fail.

I've cited some sources below in response to your arguments above, but I really I think you get a better sense of what's been going on in Honduras by squinting hard and looking at the big picture:

- does it seem likely that a legitimate constitutional succession would involve exiling the acting president at gunpoint in his pajamas?
- does it seem likely that those responsible were acting out of concern for the sanctity of the constitution when all their actions since have been to suspend and / or trample constitutionally guaranteed freedoms (banning protests and beating and murdering protesters, closing critical media outlets, demanding mayors compile lists of coup opponents)
- does it make sense to give the regime any credibility when their actions and arguments are consistently discredited (Zelaya's forged letter of resignation for instance.)
- does it make any sense to give them any credibility when they bring someone like Billy Joya into the fold? See here for resume:

http://incakolanews.blogspot.com/200...illy-joya.html

And why is it that Uribe can extend term limits to applause while this (false) claim applied to Zelaya can be used to strip him of his legitimacy?

Here are some counterarguments to your response:

The claim: the army acted legally on orders of the Supreme Court on June 28

The fact: even if the order they received preceded events (which has been questioned) and were legal itself (which it was not, as constitutional authorities have repeatedly confirmed), the Armed Forces violated the order and the law by raiding President Zelaya's house before 6 AM, and by removing him from the country. The order calls for him to be detained and for his statement on charges to be taken.

The claim: The Supreme Court had found President Zelaya guilty of treason

The fact: the public prosecutor's filing does include charges of treason, but no legal decision on them had been or has since been rendered. The forcible removal of President Zelaya denied him due process, which legally includes the presumption of innocence. President Zelaya must be presumed not guilty of treason under the presumption of innocence.

The claim: the National Congress legally replaced the president following constitutional succession.

The fact: the National Congress has no authority to remove and replace the president. It literally is not their business. The session of congress on Sunday June 28 is of questionable legitimacy. There was no recorded roll-call vote. Claims of unanimity are clearly false as more than a dozen deputies state they did not vote in favor.

From: http://hondurascoup2009.blogspot.com/2009/08/response-
to-citicism-from-coup.html

This is not a marginal viewpoint: it is the basic logic behind why the coup was so roundly condemned. The entire OAS decried it.

Regarding the charge of Zelaya's wanting to repeal term limits my understanding is that this is simply false:

1- Try to change the constitution to implement the reelection is PROHIBIT[ed] - (see article 374).

Yes. Article 374 prohibits changes to, or a sitting government official even suggesting changes to, presidential terms. But President Zelaya never made any such suggestion. What happens is that people who are supporting the coup claim either that the only reason to propose a constitutional assembly was for that purpose (which ignores the issues the Zelaya government actually proposed needed to be addressed) or that proposing a constitutional assembly would automatically put Article 374 under discussion. But in either case, the claim is that a possible outcome, denied by President Zelaya, was the same as actually committing a violation. The Honduran Constitution guarantees freedom of thought, and guarantees that you will be prosecuted only for crimes you commit.

From: http://hondurascoup2009.blogspot.com...nts-about.html

FWIW I'm convinced that Latin America is a bizarre kind of blind spot when it comes to western media coverage. It's a hack's paradise. You can simply make shit up that's palatable to the prejudices of readers and editors and submit the invoice. Nice work if you can get it, except the cost in karma terms seems pretty high.

[flintlock]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

I don't have time to read all that right now, but what is the real scoop here? Did or did not the President attempt to ignore the constitution and remain in power? If he did, I think throwing his ass out was correct regardless of any incorrect legal procedure taken to do so. Here in the USA, we probably had no legal authority to throw out the British, but did when we felt an injustice was being done.

I have been surprised at the lack of good coverage on this issue. Was this really a "coup" or merely patriots acting in a righteous manner? My guess is its just typical Banana Republic behavior, with one petty dictator wanting to throw out the other. But then I'm no expert on Honduras.

[oddlots]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

The answer is no, he did not attempt to remain in power or extend his term. Therefore the coup leaders are not patriots but usurpers as every single Latin American leader attested at the OAS in the original reaction to the coup.

[flintlock]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

Basically the Honduran elite decided that Zelaya couldn't be trusted with power (after he raised the minimum wage and made noises about convening a constitutional assembly to revisit a document which is commonly believed to be one of the worst in the world.) So they got rid of him.

That, to our eyes, they've been able to wrap themselves in the flag while doing so is testament IMHO to the west's gullibility.

I see. Thanks.

[rj1]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

I don't have time to read all that right now, but what is the real scoop here? Did or did not the President attempt to ignore the constitution and remain in power? If he did, I think throwing his ass out was correct regardless of any incorrect legal procedure taken to do so. Here in the USA, we probably had no legal authority to throw out the British, but did when we felt an injustice was being done.

I have been surprised at the lack of good coverage on this issue. Was this really a "coup" or merely patriots acting in a righteous manner? My guess is its just typical Banana Republic behavior, with one petty dictator wanting to throw out the other. But then I'm no expert on Honduras.

Zelaya (the former president) instructed the head of the military to distribute election boxes for a referendum. The referendum was for if Zelaya should be allowed to run for a second term as president. The Honduran Constitution states presidents are only allowed to run for one term. The reason for this is how easily dictatorships happen in the past in Latin America, as can be seen with Chavez in Venezuela. The head of the military refused the order and resigned, as did all the heads of the individual branches of the military.

This was where the guy I was arguing with from the British Labour Party showed he was a moron that did not understand how geopolitics work in the real world. He said that the individual military heads were perfectly fine in doing this and that "over the long run, they would be cleared of any wrongdoing". It goes to a fundamental lack of understanding on what a military is in a democracy on his part, which most people in western civilization have. Zelaya would at some point find someone in the military to carry out his order, he may have gone down to a colonel or even a major, but he would find someone to carry out his order. Military individuals only exist at the whims of the president, they carry out the orders the president give to them. If they completely disagree with the order, the only thing they can really do is resign. But someone replaces the resigned individual and will carry out the order eventually more often than not. The military point of view is that by resigning it's the only way they can tell the president that his idea is really stupid, and they want the president to reconsider. That works fine in the U.S., but in Honduras Zelaya went down to all the individual heads of the armed forces and couldn't find anyone to do it. So it showed he was power-hungry. And when he eventually found someone in the military that would do as he said, it didn't matter if that person would have been in the wrong or not, Zelaya wanted to create a fait accompli to overturn the Constitution and allow himself to be president for five years longer than he was allowed to be by the Constitution.

The Honduran Supreme Court then met, determined that Zelaya was going against the Constitution, and ordered the military to displace him as their interpretation of the Honduran Constitution due to Zelaya's actions. It was the Honduran version of "impeachment/conviction". After said removal, the head of the Honduran Congress took charge on an interim basis until the election is held in the coming year after which the winner of the election takes charge. Bad situation all around, but the Hondurans did the best they could under the circumstances.

Here's the offending part of the Constitution, translated from Spanish to English:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?...edit&redlink=1

Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution, which forbids any former chief executive from being re-elected President, states that any citizen who proposes reforming this law, and any others who support such a person directly or indirectly, are to immediately "cease carrying out" any public office. Furthermore Article 42, Section 5 of the Constitution states that citizenship is lost for "inciting, promoting or supporting the continuation or the reelection of the President of the Republic." According to the same article, revoking citizenship for this reason requires a court sentence and then a government order

When this first occurred I discussed with Hondurans and people in Honduras. I personally trust them more than the original poster. And they gave me the above translation.

[rj1]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

The answer is no, he did not attempt to remain in power or extend his term.

I always love how I can smell these people out. Present a fact, and their argument gets undercut so they deny the fact and present a news article from a pseudo-news website (real Orwellian isn't it? therealnews.com) that presents the point of view of the org. It's a classic LaRouche tactic. So what org do you work for?

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

Someone who is not familiar with the parties involved, both in Honduras and in the CIA, which has operated in various ruthless ways here and elsewhere for a long time, is probably at a disadvantage when it comes to evaluating the various arguments and counterarguments in this situation.

Personally I trust John Perkins, "The Economic Hitman", to understand the situation in Honduras more than I do what else I find.

A google search for "perkins hitman honduras zelaya" will find several recent comments by Perkins on this matter, such as a post at Honduras: Military Coup Engineered By Two US Companies?

Perkins figures that this was a CIA sponsored military coup of yet another South American leader who was working more for the interests of his own people than for the interests of Chiquita and Dole. Perkins concludes "Zelaya must be reinstated."

[rj1]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

Someone who is not familiar with the parties involved, both in Honduras and in the CIA, which has operated in various ruthless ways here and elsewhere for a long time, is probably at a disadvantage when it comes to evaluating the various arguments and counterarguments in this situation.

So you think Barack Obama, President of the United States, instructed the CIA to start a coup in Honduras?

[oddlots]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

I've just freshened up. Thanks for tipping me off.

I'm not sure what fact you're saying I'm ignoring. I suspect it's the repeated claim that the proposed referendum was to extend term limits on the presidency. From everything I've read this was simply not the case. Here's wiki:

Zelaya's order to hold a "poll" of public opinion^[9][10] led to a political crisis and a Supreme Court order for his detention executed by the military, who then expatriated him.^{[11][12][13][14]}
The poll, generally referred to as a referendum by international media, intended to assess the population's desire for a National Constituent Assembly. The Supreme Court of Honduras, Congress, the country's attorney general, and the supreme electoral tribunal opposed the poll.^[15][16][17] Congress, including Zelaya's own party, discussed whether to impeach Zelaya.^[18]
A first instance court in the Honduran capital Tegucigalpa deemed the poll unconstitutional, despite Zelaya's claims that it was a non-binding opinion poll, and not, as his opponents claimed, a binding referendum about forms of government, presidential periods, re-election, or Honduran territory. The Honduran Constitution forbids reforms to the articles in the Constitution that refer to these aspects, but it says nothing about the formation of a National Constituent Assembly, with a mandate to write a completely new constitution. Zelaya's opinion poll intended to ask Hondurans what they felt about including a fourth ballot box in the November 2009 elections, this ballot box asking Hondurans if they wanted to form such a National Constituent Assembly. The November referendum would have required a 2/3 majority vote in Congress in order to take place. This was the case Zelaya presented to the court, but his participation in the process was denied.
The president was removed by the Army on June 28, 2009 and expatriated to Costa Rica. Congress named its President, Roberto Micheletti, as President to replace Zelaya, but no country has recognized the change in office.^[19][20]

Can you please explain to me why the coup was unanimously condemned by every South American head of state?

As to the Real News being Orwellian, I'd say its just the opposite: it's a viewer supported site. You know, grass roots (and not astroturf.) Their tone annoys me at times but in this instance I think they did some great reporting. Did you watch it? As I said, how often do you see a reporter get a government official stating one fact (public participation was ~ 49 %), "undercutting" as you might say the purported "fact" cited by the government (that public participation was ~ 65%) and then get to watch the falsehood parroted by our - I'm assuming you're based in North America. If not, my apologies - representatives at an international organisation to support an election that took place in an atmosphere of widespread violence and political intimidation not to mention suspension of constitutional rights.

I posted it because I thought it was great reporting (and because that's what my masters pay me to do.)

[KGW]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

I see you understand little of the workings of the U.S. gobermint, mi amigo. :p

So you think Barack Obama, President of the United States, instructed the CIA to start a coup in Honduras?

[ThePythonicCow]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

So you think Barack Obama, President of the United States, instructed the CIA to start a coup in Honduras?

I doubt that the CIA takes orders from Obama. It's more like the other way around.

[rj1]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

I see you understand little of the workings of the U.S. gobermint, mi amigo. :p

It's not the 1960s anymore. I may be skeptical of some of my government's actions but that doesn't mean I wrap my head in tinfoil either.

I had a discussion with a Chinese person living in Shanghai on another website a month ago, where he was bringing up we have no right to have any opinion on Iran and Ahmadinejad because of the coup that we carried out 50 years ago putting in place the Shah.

Here was my response:

Luke, if you're going to try and tell us that 55 years ago our country and others did some not so nice things, well, no shit, we're not ignorant children. The only posters on this forum that thinks their country has never done anything wrong are possibly you, a couple Iranian posters, and a few Europhiles that get banned after a month because they're not able to realize that a reality exists outside of their worldview. But if you'd like to open up the can of worms to explore items from 55 years ago and expand upon those things to present day events, I and probably others would be more than happy to debate such things with you on the Rise of China forum. Although it may result in your internet connection getting cut off by your government.

As I kind of stated in another thread though regarding American actions in the past and current rhetoric from "rogue" world leaders, I don't see why the Americans organizing a coup in Iran in 1953 has anything to deal with Iran aiming to build a nuclear missile program in order to threaten the local geopolitical order, predominantly Israel. If you believe that than you believe the Germans were justified for starting World War II because the conditions imposed upon them in the World War I peace treaty was too severe.

American foreign policy, especially in the era of the Iranian coup, had a simple basis, anti-communism thanks to our major competitor for world power the Soviet Union using communist and some socialist states as vassals against us, especially after your country where Mao overthrew Chiang and 25% of the world population became communist with a snap of the fingers. Mossadegh was a self-proclaimed socialist that campaigned to nationalize the Iranian oil industry. This obviously hurt the interests of the company that was heavily in Iranian Oil, British Petroleum, and with control of oil even then increasingly overlapping control of geopolitical order, the Brits and Americans organized a coup using anti-communism as the reason. Was that right? In hindsight, probably no, but a lot of things that happen in politics and geopolitics usually are not. And anyone that thinks the world order tends itself toward "100% morality and always do the right thing that doesn't hurt anyone" is living in fantasyland. That said, I back my country's actions more often than not. You may think the Chinese were wrong on some things they've done in the past 55 years but that doesn't you don't back their position most of the time. So using stuff from 55 years ago to say why something can't be done now is 100% wrong.

"NO! YOU'RE WRONG! THE GOVERNMENT IS POISONING MY WATER! THEY OVERTHREW DEMOCRACY IN HONDURAS! LYNDON LAROUCHE IS RIGHT!" :rolleyes:

[KGW]

Re: International Community gets a Fail in Honduras

"insert color here" man speak with forked tongue. Dazzle with footwork while spewing bullshit.

Not personal, mind you, simply the case with humans who are amoral, who live without any appreciation of life beyond pecuniary matters. . .

It's not the 1960s anymore. I may be skeptical of some of my government's actions but that doesn't mean I wrap my head in tinfoil either.