32 Comments

1. Sean:

Yikes. Fact-checking next time maybe?

“This last was to revise the Honduran Constitution in Chavez-like fashion to give Zelaya a third term (and who knows how many more.)”

That is just so chock full of incorrect information. Kinda destroys any point you want to make when you’re off on some of the most basic of basics.

I’d correct you, but I think you’d stand to learn more by even just visiting the Wikipedia page.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honduras_coup

It’s really not a long read, and you won’t sound so misinformed (and thereby totally undermine your own argument).

Jul 6, 2009 - 2:12 pm 2. Insufficiently Sensitive:

Our own Government would be miles ahead to publish a copy of the Honduran Constitution where all could read it (original AND translation, please) – and then to point out the parts of it that the current Honduran Government is supposedly violating. Oh, yes – that’s exactly the same Honduran Government that chucked out its President for violating the Constitution.

Since they haven’t already done so, it’s fair to guess that the clause 239, with its instant triggering (no media circus necessary) of end-of-job status for any official who commences with steps to modify the Constitution, means what it says. ‘Any official’ here means Sr. Zelaya, since only a constituent assembly convened by the Legislature may do it – explicitly NOT the President.

That Constitution was made as iron-clad as possible to prevent continuismo of the Chavez sort.

Jul 6, 2009 - 2:20 pm 3. Dale Weeks:

The whole Honduran affair seemed like “the rule of law” working just as it should. As far as the administration’s reaction to Iran vs. Honduras; the contrast could not be starker. We’ve had 2 “events” and Obama has managed to be on the wrong side of both. It’s going to be a long, dangerous 3 1/2 years.

Jul 6, 2009 - 2:25 pm 4. The Courrier d’Avignon for Honduras « Gall Of The Gaels:

[...] In any event, his voice is much needed and appreciated.

Jul 6, 2009 - 2:34 pm 5. silence:

Well, two events and Obama has been on the side of the Socialist in one and the violent dictators in the other. Anymore questions this if this is Jimmy Carter redux?

Jul 6, 2009 - 2:45 pm 6. Victor Erimita:

A vivid demonstration of what I call the Law of the Perfect Perversity of the Left. If there is a clearly wrongheaded, immoral or sand poundingly idiotic view, policy or course of action, that is the one the Left will support.

What can be the rationale for Obama supporting Zelaya? “Order,” as opposed to at least the appearance of the chaos of a “coup?” Do they not care about his blatantly obvious intention to overthrow the rule of law in Honduras? How orderly is that? He hasn’t been secretive about it. So, no, they do know about that.

The fact that it was the military that intervened? Well, the supreme court and the legislature have also come out against Zelaya. Surely the Obamaites know that? Of course they do.

Don’t they know Zelaya is obviously following Chavez’s game plan to win total power for himself, which will certainly include the imprisonment, murder and torture of his opposition? Don’t they know the population of Honduras is terrified of what Zelaya is trying to do to them? Don’t they know he wants to align himself with fellow tyrants Chavez and the Castros? Sure, they know those things.

So, what can be their motivation to back a guy who is clearly trying to overthrow the orderly democratic institutions of his nation and align himself with the thugs who hates America? Well, he does spout leftist rhetoric, like Chavez and the Castros. So, are thugs OK so long as they spout the correct rhetoric?

It’s pretty hard at this point to see this support of Zelaya as anything but Carter-like support of anyone at all who spouts leftist rhetoric and pals around with people who hate America. Perfect Perversity.

Jul 6, 2009 - 2:56 pm 7. tim maguire:

I’ll grant that Obama’s approach is despicable, but this probably would have unfolded better if the two sides engaged in a few weeks of brinkmanship with the Honduran SC demanding Zelaya’s resignation, the legislature backing them up and Zelaya shouting “no way!” on the six o’clock news before bringing in the army.

No matter how constitutional it may be, no good democrat is comfortable having the military enforce a transition of power.

Jul 6, 2009 - 3:10 pm 8. John:

There are two kinds of voters…Those who remember what it was like when Jimmy Carter was president….and those who are starting to learn.

Jul 6, 2009 - 3:25 pm 9. AntonioSosa:

he U.S. should be supporting Hondurans and the rule of law, not a Chavez clone desperate to enslave Hondurans! It’s despicable that, rather than defending the human rights of Hondurans and Latin Americans, Obama is siding with the Marxist thugs who are trampling on those human rights and working with drug cartels and Islamic terrorist to destroy the U.S!

I guess it was to be expected from Obama. As his parents, relatives, friends and mentors, Obama is a U.S. hating Marxist. As such, he sides with Marxist dictators and would-be dictators who seek to enslave their countries and destroy the U.S.

Zelaya behaved illegally and the Honduras military acted under the orders of the country’s Supreme Court to remove that president, and to elevate the person next in line under the Honduras Constitution. This is Constitutional Democracy in action combating illegal behavior by a sitting President. Is that why Obama does not like it?

Zelaya was implementing in Honduras the scheme devised by the enemies of freedom and implemented by Chavez and the rest of the Marxist thugs to gain absolute power. They would like Zelaya to be reinstated so he can continue with his plans to enslave Honduras while pretending to act democratically. Is that why wants Zelaya reinstated?

Jul 6, 2009 - 3:37 pm 10. AntonioSosa:

Hondurans are defending themselves from the fraudulent scheme devised by the enemies of freedom and democracy to impose Marxism with “democratic” elections and referendums. Hondurans have seen this strategy unfold in the countries being destroyed by the Marxist thugs headed by Castro/Chavez. They don’t want the tragedy of those countries repeated in Honduras. They would rather be isolated for a few years than enslaved for more than 50 like the Cubans!

The enemies of democracy work along these lines in Latin America:
1. Select a wannabe dictator — a depraved megalomaniac who is ready to sell out his country (like Chavez, Morales, Correa, Zelaya). Help him run for president of the country.

2. Invest millions in a “professional” campaign demonizing the opposition and promising CHANGE to help the poor, end corruption, improve schools… whatever people want to hear.

3. Commit as much fraud as possible to make sure the wannabe dictator wins.

4. Have “protectors of human rights” like Insulza (OAS) — who have really been trampling on human rights by promoting communism for years — declare that the elections were “legal and transparent.”

5. Make sure that, once in power, the wannabe dictator takes over the Legislative and Judicial branches of power, destroys the country’s institutions, intimidates and controls the media, and demonizes, intimidates and even kills anyone trying to defend the country.

6. Have a referendum to approve a new constitution. Representatives of the people are supposed to write that constitution. In reality, people don’t even know what’s in the new constitution, which is written by Spaniards working for Castro/Chavez before the wannabe dictator even “runs” for office.

7. Have Insulza (OAS) and others who pretend to “protect human rights” declare that the referendum is perfectly “legal and transparent.”

The goal of the new constitution is to help the wannabe dictator become a full-blown dictator for life (like Castro in Cuba), prevent people from defending themselves, and use the country to help drug cartels, Islamic terrorists, etc. to destroy the U.S. And all of it under the cloak of “democracy”!

Congratulations, Hondurans! You are right! Any thinking person would rather be isolated for a few years than enslaved for more than 50 years like the Cubans!

Jul 6, 2009 - 3:40 pm 11. Frege:

I don’t know why you people are making such a big deal about this. It is in line with Obama’s long-standing commitment to scientific socialism.

Jul 6, 2009 - 3:59 pm 12. Doug Wright:

Obama doesn’t give a damn about the rule of law in the USA unless it supports his efforts to control life in the USA. So, why does anyone feel Obama would give a damn about the rule of law in Honduras.

Jul 6, 2009 - 4:03 pm 13. jeffc3:

Strong feelings -mostly directed towards a leader of a country that is not Honduras – has blurred a simple fact: there is no evidence that Zelaya was intending to serve another term. That seems to be a bit of a red herring introduced by Zelaya’s opponents. Here is the respected Salvadoran lawyer Alberto Vallente Thorenson:

“President Zelaya intended to perform a non-binding public consultation, about the conformation of an elected National Constituent Assembly. To do this, he invoked article 5 of the Honduran “Civil Participation Act” of 2006. According to this act, all public functionaries can perform non-binding public consultations to inquire what the population thinks about policy measures. This act was approved by the National Congress and it was not contested by the Supreme Court of Justice, when it was published in the Official Paper of 2006. That is, until the president of the republic employed it in a manner that was not amicable to the interests of the members of these institutions… the Honduran Constitution says nothing against the conformation of an elected National Constituent Assembly, with the mandate to draw up a completely new constitution, which the Honduran public would need to approve.”
http://counterpunch.com/thorensen07012009.html

Supporters of this coup are justifying such things as: removal and exile of an democratically elected leader ; suspension of civil rights of the population; dusk to dawn curfew enforced by the army; kidnapping and assault of foreign diplomats;
shutting down of independent media. Not even Chavez has resorted to such tactics.

Jul 6, 2009 - 4:30 pm 14. SukieTawdry:

I had my reservations at first because it wasn’t clear whether or not the Supreme Court had the Constitutional authority to order the military to do anything (and thank God ours doesn’t) and commentators seemed to want to sidestep that issue. Now that more information has emerged, it seems the Court did have the authority (at least in this situation). It would help if Obama, Clinton, the UN et al would show us the Constitutional provision(s) that prohibit such action as others have supplied the specific articles that allow, if not require, it. Hang tough, Honduras. Looking forward to Burgard’s report.

Jul 6, 2009 - 4:30 pm 15. LenS:

Check out Hunter’s Blog to see what they are saying about the shooting yesterday. Appears to not have been a military round. This is the guy the warned of the Fauxtography linked above.

Jul 6, 2009 - 5:02 pm 16. Terrye:

I heard someone say that Obama supported what the Hondurans did, but not the way they did. He liked the outcome, but not the means.

However, that is not what he has said. So far, he has meddled in Honduras in such a way to give the appearance that he is pandering to Chavez. It is embarrassing to watch this man flail around and screw up everything he touches.

Jul 6, 2009 - 5:10 pm 17. Brian Macker:

Obama just wants to set a precident when he attempts to go for his third term. That and his love for all things socialist/communist.

Jul 6, 2009 - 5:30 pm 18. Steve:

jeffc3, the Honduran military was acting under orders from the Supreme Court. Zeyala’s own party helped to impeach him. He was replaced by a member of his own party. Does that sound like a coup? If you cannot tell the truth, stay off this site.

Jul 6, 2009 - 5:49 pm 19. qrstuv:

Sean tells us that wikipedia is apolitical and above the fray! Well, that’s convenient!

Jul 6, 2009 - 5:52 pm 20. Bill Lever:

Now that President Obama has shown he will not help democratic governments and will not fight authoritarian ones, we can expect aggressive moves from authoritarians around the world.

Things I recommend following:

Where will Cuban, Venezuelan or Bolivian soldiers begin fighting? South/Central America: (Colombia, Honduras, Guatemala, Panama)? Africa again?

What is Russia’s next adventure? Have they stopped the Bear bomber flights along the east coast now that Obama is president because they judge that he is squish and there is no need to test him further? (Funny, we now run Air Force One at New York ourselves).

Where will Chinese naval presence first influence political events? Africa, Indian Ocean, Cenrtal America, South America?

Will Argentina start beating the Falkland Island war drums? Could Britain count on any of the the logisitcal and intelligence help that Ronbald Reagan offered Margaret Thacher?

A few more bad weeks like this and global security is going to be looking a lot worse.

I’m just saying….

Elections matter.

Ps. As Vladimir Putin’s delicius insult, while Obama is meeting with the Russian puppet president this week, who could Putin be making a big, big, big arms deal with at the very same moment?

Maybe Putin can even be playing audio and video of the American in the background as he makes the deal. It might be hilarious to him. And the teleprompter would never have a clue.

Roger, you’re movelist here, not me.

Jul 6, 2009 - 6:00 pm 21. Jay B:

jeffc3;

I don’t know if Thorensen is a respected Salvadoran lawyer (according to whom?) who doesn’t practice in Honduras but he is certainly a sloppy lawyer when it comes to the facts and the constitutional interpretation. While I question his version of past events within his article, Thorensen conveniently neglected to include pertinent incidents such as Zelaya’s firing the military chief of staff for refusing to violate a Supreme Court ruling, zelaya’s refusal to reinstate the military head after the Supreme Court ordered it, zelaya leading a break in to retrieve confiscated ballot materials. The number of constitutional violations is innumerable and Zelaya was properly removed from office.

Jul 6, 2009 - 6:30 pm 22. Lightnin' Hopkins:

It would appear that Thorenson is respected by those who “…actively support the struggle of peoples for a more just distribution of resources.” This according to the website for the Norwegian Solidarity Committee with Latin America, where he serves on the board:

http://tinyurl.com/n29tt5

So, in other words, he is “respected” by communists, etc.

Jul 6, 2009 - 7:45 pm 23. jeffc3:

I’ll make a rebuttal – then I’m outta here…

Jay B – the “pertinent incidents” all occurred in response to actions which Thorensen contends were legal under Honduran law. Surely you are not arguing that people should just bow down to unjust and arbitrary rulings?

Steve – above also applies. “If you cannot tell the truth, stay off this site” – spoken like a true defender of democratic principles!

Again, people, the righteous cause you so want to believe in should not have to be upheld by arbitrary arrests, curfews, shootings, assaults, and suppression of the media.

Jul 6, 2009 - 8:06 pm 24. David Thomson:

“Here is the respected Salvadoran lawyer Alberto Vallente Thorenson”

It turns out that this man is a radical leftist—perhaps even an outright Communist:

“Alberto Valiente Thoresen was born in San Salvador, El Salvador. He currently resides in Norway where he serves on the board of the Norwegian Solidarity Committee with Latin America. He wrote this column for Rebel Reports.”

Thoresen is not to be taken seriously. Zelaya is supported by obviously less than admirable people.

Jul 6, 2009 - 8:15 pm 25. Richard Nieporent:

Counterpunch is an extreme leftist/Marxist anti-Semitic site. Other than that there is nothing wrong with jeffc3’s source of information.

Jul 6, 2009 - 8:36 pm 26. Barry Dauphin:

Obama gets pictured yukking it up with Chavez and accepts his book. Now he sides with Chavez and against a wise Latina woman justice (see Instapundit). At what point does he no longer get a pass as to his sympathies.

Jul 6, 2009 - 8:48 pm 27. dog:

You guys sure are self strokers are’nt you.

Jul 6, 2009 - 10:29 pm 28. Lightnin' Hopkins:

“You guys sure are self strokers are’nt you.”

This from someone called “dog” — I mean, the joke writes itself, doesn’t it?

Jul 7, 2009 - 6:28 am 29. Mike_K:

I think some are being unfair to Carter when comparing Obama’s recent behavior to him. Carter was naive but his commitment to human rights, while sometimes ineffective and even amusing, was sincere. Obama’s is not. I think there is a lot of similarity in the way the two of them have turned Congress loose to destroy the economy but Carter’s foreign policy, while ineffective and sometimes counterproductive (like Iran), was not overtly anti-American as I think Obama’s may be.

Jul 7, 2009 - 7:18 am 30. Insufficiently Sensitive:

Here is the respected Salvadoran lawyer Alberto Vallente Thorenson:

Hey, that’s the well-connected SUV-driving criminally-linked lawyer Alberto Vallente Thorenson! I read a different newspaper.

Jul 7, 2009 - 9:38 am 31. Insufficiently Sensitive:

Supporters of this coup are justifying such things as: removal and exile of an democratically elected leader ; suspension of civil rights of the population; dusk to dawn curfew enforced by the army; kidnapping and assault of foreign diplomats;
shutting down of independent media. Not even Chavez has resorted to such tactics.

Such an earnest assertion! Sorry, it has serious flaws. Even Chavez has shut down independent media and packed the supreme court of Venezuela so that his contraventions of law can be ‘ruled’ legal.

The defense of Zelaya had better invent better ‘facts’ than those ones. The Hondurans have every right to defend themselves against continuismo, particularly as practiced oh-so-legally (one man, one vote, once) by Hugo Chavez.

Jul 7, 2009 - 9:47 am 32. brainfood:

Interestingly, the Honduran Constitution of 1982 does provide for loss of citizenship for those who “incite, promote or aid in the continuation or re-election of the President” http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Honduras/hond05.html (article 42):
ARTICULO 42.- La calidad de ciudadano se pierde:
5. Por incitar, promover o apoyar el continuismo o la reelección del Presidente de la República; y,
Further, Article 239 indicates that anyone who has held the office of chief executive cannot be president or vice president and anyone who proposes reform to that prohibition can be barred from holding public office for ten years:
ARTICULO 239.- El ciudadano que haya desempeñado la titularidad del Poder Ejecutivo no podrá ser Presidente o Vicepresidente de la República.
El que quebrante esta disposición o proponga su reforma, así como aquellos que lo apoyen directa o indirectamente, cesarán de inmediato en el desempeño de sus respectivos cargos y quedarán inhabilitados por diez (10) años para el ejercicio de toda función pública.
My educated guess on that provision is that it is aimed move at banning past military dictators from pursuing the office than it is a stricture contra re-election, per se.
Additionally, Article 374 bars any amendments regarding the length of the presidential term (amongst other things:
ARTICULO 374.- No podrán reformarse, en ningún caso, el artículo anterior, el presente artículo, los artículos constitucionales que se refieren a la forma de gobierno, al territorio nacional, al período presidencial, a la prohibición para ser nuevamente Presidente de la República, el ciudadano que lo haya desempeñado bajo cualquier título y el referente a quienes no pueden ser Presidentes de la República por el período subsiguiente.
As such, it is pretty clear why the Supreme Court of Justice ruled against Zelaya’s plebiscite proposal in the first place. It also means that if the vote had been allowed to happen it would have had no legal standing.

Jul 7, 2009 - 1:41 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: