PDA

View Full Version : Honduras boots wanne be leftist dictator.



K.Bullock
06-29-2009, 10:57 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124623220955866301.html

Hillary and Obama Cry foul?!? What is that about?



The attorney general had already made clear that the referendum was illegal, and he further announced that he would prosecute anyone involved in carrying it out. Yesterday, Mr. Zelaya was arrested by the military and is now in exile in Costa Rica.

It remains to be seen what Mr. Zelaya's next move will be. It's not surprising that chavistas throughout the region are claiming that he was victim of a military coup. They want to hide the fact that the military was acting on a court order to defend the rule of law and the constitution, and that the Congress asserted itself for that purpose, too.

Mrs. Clinton has piled on as well. Yesterday she accused Honduras of violating "the precepts of the Interamerican Democratic Charter" and said it "should be condemned by all." Fidel Castro did just that. Mr. Chávez pledged to overthrow the new government.

Honduras is fighting back by strictly following the constitution. The Honduran Congress met in emergency session yesterday and designated its president as the interim executive as stipulated in Honduran law. It also said that presidential elections set for November will go forward. The Supreme Court later said that the military acted on its orders. It also said that when Mr. Zelaya realized that he was going to be prosecuted for his illegal behavior, he agreed to an offer to resign in exchange for safe passage out of the country. Mr. Zelaya denies it.

Bob Gutermuth
06-29-2009, 11:20 AM
If Clinton and Osama are again it, it must be something worthy of American support.

YardleyLabs
06-29-2009, 12:07 PM
At some point, if we are going to support democracy in other countries, we must voice our support for democratically elected governments against the power of a military coup. The issue of opposing coups d'etats by the military or others to overthrow elected governments has nothing to do with whether or not we support the individual policies of those elected governments. The coup in Honduras has been opposed by the EU and by most democratic countries.

K.Bullock
06-29-2009, 12:12 PM
At some point, if we are going to support democracy in other countries, we must voice our support for democratically elected governments against the power of a military coup. The issue of opposing coups d'etats by the military or others to overthrow elected governments has nothing to do with whether or not we support the individual policies of those elected governments. The coup in Honduras has been opposed by the EU and by most democratic countries.


I would understand that under normal circumstances. it seems though that this coup was staged to protect democracy. The Honduran congress and Military, as far as I know to this point, acted within the constitutional laws of their country. It seems that we should support that not oppose it. Am I missing something?

Hew
06-29-2009, 12:18 PM
Am I missing something?
You apparently read the linked article whereas Yardley apparently didn't. ;-)

YardleyLabs
06-29-2009, 01:01 PM
You apparently read the linked article whereas Yardley apparently didn't. ;-)
I read it, including the fact that it was an opinion piece rather than a news article. The issue is not the legality of Zelayas' efforts to have a referendum on modifying the Honduran constitution. It appears that such a referendum would have been illegal although it is not clear why a non-binding resolution would have been illegal. However, that does not justify actions outside of the constitution to remove the President.

As far as I can tell, there is no basis either for removing the President under the constitution or even for the President to retire. Under Honduran law, Zelayas would remain President until January 2010 with power subject to the limitations of law and balanced by an independent judiciary and legislature. If the law would support arresting the President, that should have been the action taken with a subsequent trial a verdict under honduran law.

Presumably, the illegal nature of the action to remove Zelayas was the reason for claiming that he had resigned from his position. However, Zelayas denies ever having signed such a letter or having agreed to resign.

Ultimately, as in Iran, the selection of leaders is an internal issue, not an American one. In both places, however, it is appropriate for the administration to voice its support for democratic procedures that follow the laws of the countries, standards of international law, and in the case of Honduras, the standards of the OAS of which Honduras is a member.

BonMallari
06-29-2009, 01:12 PM
The US record of backing coup or juntas and backing the wrong side is well documented...We always seem to back someone only to have to throw them out later....Noriega, the Shah of Iran,Ferdinand Marcos to name a few

Hew
06-29-2009, 01:16 PM
Hmmm....in one corner we have the Honduran Constitution, the Honduran Supreme Court, the Honduran Congress, and the Honduran Attorney General.

And in the other corner we have the leftist ex-president of Honduras trying his best to usurp more power, Hugo Chavez, the Castro Brothers, Hillary Clinton and Yardley Labs.

Gee, I wonder which side is right?

YardleyLabs
06-29-2009, 01:18 PM
The US record of backing coup or juntas and backing the wrong side is well documented...We always seem to back someone only to have to throw them out later....Noriega, the Shah of Iran,Ferdinand Marcos to name a few
Of course, we usually are backing the military ouster of the democratically elected leadership as the right wants us to do again. The unusual aspect here is that the administration has voiced support for a legal process and opposed the coup.

Uncle Bill
06-29-2009, 03:58 PM
Of course, we usually are backing the military ouster of the democratically elected leadership as the right wants us to do again. The unusual aspect here is that the administration has voiced support for a legal process and opposed the coup.

You are WAY off base in this ass-um-tion. What the right in this nation wants is for the obvious phoney that got 'elected' to office, and was term limited, to stand down at the end of his term. We also see this happening once ACORN has bought all the votes needed in this nation, proposing the same thing at the end of the BHO term.

Unlike your view of electing a 'messiah', he's still subject to the regulations of the constitution...your backing ACORN and Soros be damned.

As Atlas continues to shrug, and your most avid BHO fans see they've been had because these stupid programs getting voted in are only for the unionized benefit, those losing their jobs will suddenly become your worst enemy.

It's just a matter of time before the startled ignoramuses that followed your leftist promises, will see the lies among the obfuscations written by the prompter, and relayed by the messiah. Even you will soon run out of excuses for what you KNOW is a huge reduction of your freedoms with each passing bill from this purely Democrat majority.

As those that have been taxed out the wazoo quit squatting for your insane programs, and run out of money to fund your socialism, the BHO leadership will be calling on thee to pick up the slack. And when your ilk fails to provide all the SFN crowd with their whims, what's your plan to hide?

Just remember what Tonto said to the Lone Ranger when they were surrounded by Indians..."What you mean, Kemo Sabe?"

UB

Franco
06-29-2009, 07:20 PM
Anyone surprised that Obama is siding with his buddies Chavez and Castro?

The military was acting to protect thier constitution and directed by thier government against a power grab by thier President.

Could be a precursor to Obama doing away with term limits here.

Uncle Bill
06-30-2009, 12:27 PM
At some point, if we are going to support democracy in other countries, we must voice our support for democratically elected governments against the power of a military coup. The issue of opposing coups d'etats by the military or others to overthrow elected governments has nothing to do with whether or not we support the individual policies of those elected governments. The coup in Honduras has been opposed by the EU and by most democratic countries.


How is it that you are always on the wrong side of justice??? The 'coup' is exactly what this nation is going to need to get rid of the leadership folks like you continue to foist on America.

UB



(From THE WALL STREET JOURNAL)
By Mary Anastasia O'Grady
Hugo Chavez's coalition-building efforts suffered a setback yesterday when the
Honduran military sent its president packing for abusing the nation's
constitution.
It seems that President Mel Zelaya miscalculated when he tried to emulate the
success of his good friend Hugo in reshaping the Honduran Constitution to his
liking.
But Honduras is not out of the Venezuelan woods yet. Yesterday the Central
American country was being pressured to restore the authoritarian Mr. Zelaya by
the likes of Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, Hillary Clinton and, of course, Hugo
himself. The Organization of American States, having ignored Mr. Zelaya's
abuses, also wants him back in power. It will be a miracle if Honduran patriots
can hold their ground.
That Mr. Zelaya acted as if he were above the law, there is no doubt. While
Honduran law allows for a constitutional rewrite, the power to open that door
does not lie with the president. A constituent assembly can only be called
through a national referendum approved by its Congress.
But Mr. Zelaya declared the vote on his own and had Mr. Chavez ship him the
necessary ballots from Venezuela . The Supreme Court ruled his referendum
unconstitutional, and it instructed the military not to carry out the logistics
of the vote as it normally would do.
The top military commander, Gen. Romeo Vasquez Velasquez, told the president
that he would have to comply. Mr. Zelaya promptly fired him. The Supreme Court
ordered him reinstated. Mr. Zelaya refused.
Calculating that some critical mass of Hondurans would take his side, the
president decided he would run the referendum himself. So on Thursday he led a
mob that broke into the military installation where the ballots from Venezuela
were being stored and then had his supporters distribute them in defiance of
the Supreme Court's order.

It remains to be seen what Mr. Zelaya's next move will be. It's not surprising
that chavistas throughout the region are claiming that he was victim of a
military coup. They want to hide the fact that the military was acting on a
court order to defend the rule of law and the constitution, and that the
Congress asserted itself for that purpose, too.
Mrs. Clinton has piled on as well. Yesterday she accused Honduras of violating
"the precepts of the Interamerican Democratic Charter" and said it "should be
condemned by all." Fidel Castro did just that. Mr. Chavez pledged to overthrow
the new government.
Honduras is fighting back by strictly following the constitution. The Honduran
Congress met in emergency session yesterday and designated its president as the
interim executive as stipulated in Honduran law. It also said that presidential
elections set for November will go forward. The Supreme Court later said that
the military acted on its orders. It also said that when Mr. Zelaya realized
that he was going to be prosecuted for his illegal behavior, he agreed to an
offer to resign in exchange for safe passage out of the country. Mr. Zelaya
denies it.
Many Hondurans are going to be celebrating Mr. Zelaya's foreign excursion.
Street protests against his heavy-handed tactics had already begun last week.
On Friday a large number of military reservists took their turn. "We won't go
backwards," one sign said. "We want to live in peace, freedom and development."

For Hondurans who still remember military dictatorship, Mr. Zelaya also has
another strike against him: He keeps rotten company. Earlier this month he
hosted an OAS general assembly and led the effort, along side OAS Secretary
General Jose Miguel Insulza, to bring Cuba back into the supposedly democratic
organization.

The struggle against chavismo has never been about left-right politics. It is
about defending the independence of institutions that keep presidents from
becoming dictators. This crisis clearly delineates the problem. In failing to
come to the aid of checks and balances, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Insulza exposetheir true colors.

Bob Gutermuth
06-30-2009, 12:35 PM
America needs to keep leftist dictators from assuming power in the hemisphere if possible. We should have done something about keeping Chavez out of office, he will be a thorn in our side as long as he is in office. The longer the currant occupant continues to be in the White House, the more America will see what damage leftists can do in a free country.

code3retrievers
06-30-2009, 12:47 PM
Despite our media and our government stating the opposite, this was not a "Military Coup" the military has not and is not in charge.

The president was attempting to change the constitution illegally. He was voted out by even his own party. He refused to leave and the Honduran supreme court ordered his removal and his replacement with a member of his own party.

It would be like Nixon being impeached and refusing to leave office. He would have been removed forcibly and replaced with his Vice president

It's funny how Obama would not support the people of Iran when obviously there was a chance for liberty (he stated he did not want to interfere with the internal politics of another country) but he sure will speak out against a government removing its president (want to be dictator) legally.

Eric Johnson
06-30-2009, 12:55 PM
To put this in perspective....

Suppose the US President decides to hold a referendum to make himself "President for Life". The Supreme Ct rules against him.....

It's not an illegal move against the President of Honduras. Instead the President's unconstitutional actions have brought this on by the order of the Honduran Supreme Court.

...and Obama and Hilary are supporting Zelaya? Tsk, tsk.


OBAMA MORE THAN 'CONCERNED'
By Neal Boortz @ June 30, 2009 8:11 AM

North Korea launches a missile and it takes Barack Obama and the UN five days to respond. Iran holds fraudulent elections, kills protesters and it takes weeks before Barack Obama can stand up and say that he is "concerned" about the situation.

Then the people of Honduras try to uphold their constitution and laws of the land from being trampled by a Chavez-wanna be ... and it takes Barack Obama one day to proclaim that this was not a legal coup.

Why the sudden decisiveness? Where were these strong opinions on foreign matters when Iranian authorities were trampling protestors and cutting off media access to the outside world? Where was this decisiveness when Kim Jong Ill decided that he was going to launch missiles toward Hawaii on the Fourth of July? Why ... NOW ... is Obama suddenly speaking out loudly

How about a little background. Are you really sure you know what has been going on in Honduras? Do you think that this was simply a coup? Let me give you a rough outline here, and then you can sit back and wonder just why PrezBO is in the weeds with Chavez and Castro on this one.

Mel Zelaya is, or was, the President of Honduras. He and Hugo Chaves were tight. So tight, it seems, that Zelaya wanted to emulate Hugo by changing the Honduran constitution to allow him to run for office until he durned well gets tired of it.

To change the constitution in Honduras you have to convene a constituent assembly. The president cannot do that. The Honduran congress must approve a national referendum calling for the constituent assembly to consider changes to the constitution. Zelaya didn't like the part about the constitution requiring approval of the congress before a national referendum could be called. So ... he decided to call one on his own.

OK .. so here we have President Zelaya calling for a national referendum when he doesn't have the power to do so. The next problem is obtaining ballots! Since the Honduran congress had not called for the referendum, as required by the constitution, the government certainly wasn't going to print the ballots! After all, how smart would it be to print ballots for an illegal referendum? So ... Zelaya had to get the ballots printed elsewhere. Here's an idea! Get his pall Hugo Chavez to print them! Yes! That will work!

So Chaves prints Zelaya's ballots and they're shipped to Honduras. Enter the Honduran Supreme Court. The court considers Zelaya's election in light of the requirements of the Honduran constitution, and rules the referendum illegal and unconstitutional. The court then issues an order to the Honduran military telling them not to do the logistical work associated with Zelaya's phony referendum. Remember, now ... all of this has one primary goal. To get rid of the term limits limiting Zelaya's rule in Honduras.

After the supreme court's decision, General Romeo Velasquez tells President Zelaya that he is subject to a proper order from the Supreme Court and will not be able to carry out Zelaya's referendum. So ... Zelaya fires him. The Supreme Court orders Zelaya to reinstate Velasquez, and Zelaya refuses to do so.

At this point Zelaya's ego is getting the better of him. If the military won't run his illegal referendum, he'll just do it himself. He gins up a mob and leads them to the military compound where Hugo's ballots are stored and then has his supporters begin distributing the ballots to the masses.

Based on the Supreme Court's ruling the Honduran attorney general said that the proposed referendum was illegal and said that he would arrest anyone attempting to carry out the election. Zelaya was arrested by the military and was escorted out of the country.

Now ... does this sound like a military coup-de-etat to you? The attorney general and the military were operating in accordance with the Honduran rule of law. They acted under a valid court order. Coup? The Honduran congress has convened and designated a successor president, all in accordance with the Honduran Constitution. Military coup? The presidential elections set for November .. the election that Zelaya was trying to get around ... will go on as scheduled. A blow for democracy?

Fidel Castro, Daniel Noriega, Hugo Chavez ... all on the side of Zelaya. But Obama? Obama fighting against the rule of law and for a wannabe dictator? What gives?

YardleyLabs
06-30-2009, 01:10 PM
If you want to put it in perspective, a better analogy would be that the President of the united States seeks a national, non-binding referendum on whether or not the people would like to see an amendment to the constitution eliminating term limits for the President. Congress and the Courts rule the the President has no authority to conduct such a referendum but the President asks that sch a question be placed in the Census questionnaire anyway and proceeds to distribute these. The Joint Chiefs of Staff organize a military unit to enter the White House at night, remove the President from his bed, place him in an airplane, ship him off to another country, and announce that the Speaker of the House is now President.

In this country, we would call that insurrection and treason despite the illegal actions by the President.

{Just for argument's sake, assume that the President is GWB and the Speaker is Nancy Pelosi]

Franco
06-30-2009, 02:20 PM
If you want to put it in perspective, a better analogy would be that the President of the united States seeks a national, non-binding referendum on whether or not the people would like to see an amendment to the constitution eliminating term limits for the President. Congress and the Courts rule the the President has no authority to conduct such a referendum but the President asks that sch a question be placed in the Census questionnaire anyway and proceeds to distribute these. The Joint Chiefs of Staff organize a military unit to enter the White House at night, remove the President from his bed, place him in an airplane, ship him off to another country, and announce that the Speaker of the House is now President.

In this country, we would call that insurrection and treason despite the illegal actions by the President.

{Just for argument's sake, assume that the President is GWB and the Speaker is Nancy Pelosi]

With Obama incharge of the 2010 Census, you know working America will be in even bigger trouble.

Your hyperthetical is not possible. But, in some derranged world, I would have to support Mrs. P.
I couldn't come to terms with spelling out her name.

Eric Johnson
06-30-2009, 02:41 PM
No Jeff. You have missed some salient facts.

1. The referendum would be unofficial since there is no basis in law for this. Further, why do it at all? It could have no impact on the governance of the country. The people elect the "Congress" and the "Congress" has to act to modify the constitution. The "Congress" didn't take action as is their cchoice under the law. If the people didn't like that, the people would have a chance at the next election to voice their opinion.

2. The Supreme Ct. would have ordered the military to intercede on the country's behalf.

3. The President would have fired the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

4. The Supreme Ct. would have ordered the general's re-instatement and the President would have unlawfully refused.

5. The Attorney General would have requested the military to act since the President was acting outside the law.

It's neither an insurrection nor treason. The military leaders are following the orders of the Supreme Ct. That can't be treason by definition.

Basically, every actor in the Honduran situation has acted within their law...except for President Zeyala. He's a tinpot dictator and the foreign policy makers of this country should be ashamed of themselves for supporting him.

Eric

Goose
06-30-2009, 03:24 PM
So our Dear Leader (with his pals Castro and Chavez) supports a tinpot, fascist dictator. Birds of a feather...

We live in Cuba now.

K.Bullock
06-30-2009, 03:30 PM
No Jeff. You have missed some salient facts.

1. The referendum would be unofficial since there is no basis in law for this. Further, why do it at all? It could have no impact on the governance of the country. The people elect the "Congress" and the "Congress" has to act to modify the constitution. The "Congress" didn't take action as is their cchoice under the law. If the people didn't like that, the people would have a chance at the next election to voice their opinion.

2. The Supreme Ct. would have ordered the military to intercede on the country's behalf.

3. The President would have fired the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

4. The Supreme Ct. would have ordered the general's re-instatement and the President would have unlawfully refused.

5. The Attorney General would have requested the military to act since the President was acting outside the law.

It's neither an insurrection nor treason. The military leaders are following the orders of the Supreme Ct. That can't be treason by definition.

Basically, every actor in the Honduran situation has acted within their law...except for President Zeyala. He's a tinpot dictator and the foreign policy makers of this country should be ashamed of themselves for supporting him.

Eric
I think your spot on. It is a no-brainer that one less Chavez in South America is good for all free people in this hemisphere. What concerns me in this situation is how our new government is spinning it.

China says nothing about other governments abusing their people because they do and the intend to keep doing it. Is the U.S. under Obama heading in that direction?

Uncle Bill
06-30-2009, 03:48 PM
If you want to put it in perspective, a better analogy would be that the President of the united States seeks a national, non-binding referendum on whether or not the people would like to see an amendment to the constitution eliminating term limits for the President. Congress and the Courts rule the the President has no authority to conduct such a referendum but the President asks that sch a question be placed in the Census questionnaire anyway and proceeds to distribute these. The Joint Chiefs of Staff organize a military unit to enter the White House at night, remove the President from his bed, place him in an airplane, ship him off to another country, and announce that the Speaker of the House is now President.

In this country, we would call that insurrection and treason despite the illegal actions by the President.

{Just for argument's sake, assume that the President is GWB and the Speaker is Nancy Pelosi]


HOLY CUHUHUHRRRRAAAAP!!! JEFF...

You are further gone than ever. There was a time I actually believed there was hope in the long run for you, but you'll die of the wounds you are inflicting on yourself for falling on the sword for your messiah.

When will you face the facts that if it looks like a turd, smells like a turd, it's a turd!!! Regardless of how frequently you and your ilk eat it, you can't make it palatable for the rest of the sane thinkers in this nation.

But I do thank you for showing your stripes, so we all see how deeply in the tank you really are. There was a time you may have been saved from drowning, but no more. RIP

UB

YardleyLabs
06-30-2009, 03:55 PM
HOLY CUHUHUHRRRRAAAAP!!! JEFF...

You are further gone than ever. There was a time I actually believed there was hope in the long run for you, but you'll die of the wounds you are inflicting on yourself for falling on the sword for your messiah.

When will you face the facts that if it looks like a turd, smells like a turd, it's a turd!!! Regardless of how frequently you and your ilk eat it, you can't make it palatable for the rest of the sane thinkers in this nation.

But I do thank you for showing your stripes, so we all see how deeply in the tank you really are. There was a time you may have been saved from drowning, but no more. RIP

UB
Well, in this case, the turd looks like a military coup. I have no love for Zelaya, but believe he should either serve out his term until January 2010 or be removed legally. Hauling him out of bed in the middle of the night, faking a letter of resignation, and depositing him in Costa Rica is not the rule of law. Do I believe we should intervene? No. Do I believe we should support the new administration? No, unless defensive actions are undertaken to prevent external attack in conjunction with other nations and our support does nothing to support the government. Do I believe that their Constitution should be amended to allow a President to serve more than one term? It's not any of our business.

Bob Gutermuth
07-03-2009, 09:39 AM
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=102889

Franco
07-03-2009, 10:59 AM
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=102889

I agree with Pat on many issues including this one and illegal immigration.

The UN is a joke and we should have kicked thm out a long time ago. And, what should we expect from our Marxist President? Look for him to try and do away with term limits as well here in the USA. Remember, the Dems are loading up on voting illegals to ensure thier power for a long time. Why do you supposed he has stopped any investigation into ACORN?