PINAR DEL RIO


support babalú


Your donations help fund
our continued operation

do you babalú?

what they’re saying


bestlatinosmall.jpg

quotes.gif

activism


ozt_bilingual


buclbanner

recommended reading





babalú features





recent comments


  • asombra: In the top photo, note who’s doing the talking, and how the token Negro sits quietly like a good boy.

  • asombra: Not nearly as deaf as those who wouldn’t listen to basic reason in 2008, and especially in 2012. I am seriously fed up...

  • asombra: I wonder sometimes if these people ever hear themselves write, so to speak. Would they ever criticize ANYTHING said against a...

  • asombra: Veiga looks like Saladrigas, and the other stooge has a Joe García air. Imagine that.

  • asombra: The NYT is not vying to be Granma North–it already is, and even I am somewhat surprised at how overtly it’s been...

search babalu

babalú archives

frequent topics


elsewhere on the net



realclearworld

More on our Comrade Presidente and his Poletariat

Obama stands with castro, Chavez and Ortega:

President Obama sides with the Fidel Castro and his thug epigones Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega. As the Honduran President Mel Zelaya sought to conduct an illegal referendum to extend his rule, the Honduran military sought to enforce the rule of law by removing Zelaya from the scene.

Also from the Powerline post, quoting Mary Anastasia O'Grady:

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. Chávez 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.

Hillary cries "Venceremos!":

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.

O'Grady nails it:

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 expose their true colors.

45 comments to More on our Comrade Presidente and his Poletariat

  • Larry Daley

    Val:

    Well said.

    In supporting Zelaya the present US administration defines itself.

  • FreedomForCuba

    Val,

    The plan is set in motion to try to retorn this lefty to office.

    The accomplices are:

    1. The Castro regime.

    2. Hugo Chavez.

    3. The OAS led by the lefty Insulza , the Obama administration and the UN.

    4. Plus all the other lefties in Latin America.

    The Honduras Congress and the military must stand strong against all these external forces working to establish another Marxist regime in the Americas.

    If they don't we know what would happen next.

  • pototo

    Could this have something to do with Obama's slant?
    HJ 5 IH

    111th CONGRESS

    1st Session

    H. J. RES. 5

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

    January 6, 2009

    Mr. SERRANO introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    JOINT RESOLUTION

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

    ‘Article--

    ‘The twenty-second article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.’.

  • caballerodeparis1

    Isn't the United States a signatory to the Inter-American Democratic Charter of 9/11/01? Might not that explain why the Obama Administration hasn't embraced the coup and why it fought the OAS about readmitting Cuba? I'm no fan of Zelaya but for a quarter century the United States--across administrations--has been insisting with the countries of Latin America that representative democracy, free elections, and free markets are a path to a brighter future for the region. It seems short-sighted, not to say hypocritical, to now embrace a blatantly anti-democratic putsch.

  • Larry Daley

    Caballero:

    You might go back to your old bench on El Prado boulevard

    since you are blatently incorrect when you state:

    that the concurrent events in Honduras are a:"a blatantly anti-democratic putsch."

  • Larry Daley

    How does one reach Yahoo.news its coverage of events in Honduras is blatently one sided.

  • Honey

    Caballero,
    The Hondurans, with the acceptance of the Honduran Supreme Court, who are staging this coup are as anti democratic as those in Venezuela who would like to get rid of their tyrant but can't because they didn't stage a coup early enough. They are also like those Iranians who flooded the streets to fight their tyrannical government.

    Would you sit still if this disastrous current president would suddenly order that he be president forever? Would that be okay with you.
    It wouldn't be okay with me.

  • FreedomForCuba

    caballero,

    For the last ten years Hugo Chavez has made one anti-democratic move after another in Venezuela and what the United States of America, the OAS and EU have done about it?

    Please....

    Look at Ortega in Nicaragua, Correa in Ecuador, Morales in Bolivia how they are grabbing power and who's condemning them?

    You call it a coup but fail to acknowledge that that the Honduran Congress was behind the move because President Zelaya was trying to bypass the Honduran constitution which contains term limits for the country's President that cannot be changed by a rigged vote.

    These lefties are all cut from the same bullshit cloth. They arrive to power via Democratic means by fooling the people and once in power they start making moves to change the constitution (like Chavez just did) to perpetuate themselves in power for the rest of their lives and implement a Marxist society.

    But guess what? they still have the freaking balls to tell the world that their countries are democratic.

    Come on, give me a freaking brake...you have to be kidding me.

    And Zelaya was trying to make the same move (cut out of Hugo Chavez's book) in Honduras. But I guess that's OK with you.

    That the real coup to Democracy taking place in Latin-America is what Zelaya, Chavez, Correa, Morales and Ortega are doing to their respective countries.

    The United States of America did nothing to stop it during the previous administration.

    Now we have a Marxist President in the White House that is even encouraging this power grab by the Latin-American Marxists.

  • caballerodeparis1

    Guys, for once I wish that you would leave the ad hominen attacks aside. It's easy to be freedom-loving and coup-supporting on a blog but the United States stands for the rule of law and the coup--no matter how noble--is a violation of the law and of the principles that we said we would support when we signed on to the Charter in 2001. I know that Chavez, Correa y Compania are dictators but what you guys are suggesting--that the coup's ends justify it--is a recipe for a return to the days of disappearances, guerilla wars, and economic catastrophe for the region. Sometimes, people vote for bad people (on this blog many rail against Obama but, to their credit, they have also made it clear from Election Night onward that the vox populi is the final word). But if the election is mostly fair and the result is that the populist anti-American clown wins, that is the price of having an election. The opposition in Venezuela is weak because they suck at getting voters to the polls--something that Chavez does well--in that, he is no different than scumbags like Sharpe James or Huey Long. What the lovers of democarcy in Latin America need isn't more army-led coups but better political operators.

  • Larry Daley

    Caballero:

    When one of power of three power state takes over it is a coup. When such a candidate decides to hold an elections, which besides being declared unconstitutional, was done under Chavez's auspices and guidance it is madness not to stop him then and there ...

  • FreedomForCuba

    caballero,

    Trust me, elections are never fair under Hugo Chavez and company as they manipulate votes in their favor.

    You know what? I rather have these bastards thrown from power by any means (including a coup).

    Look what happens to Latin-America today. Don't tell me that they're better off under these so called "Democracies".

    People still disappear in these countries under these regimes (so tell me where is the rule of law that you so claim), government opposition has been jailed or in the run (just like the old days).

    These countries are poorer than ever even thought they have gotten record oil revenues in their nation's history (as in the case of Venezuela), so I don't see the difference you mention from the old days, if anything they have gotten much worse.

    All these countries have gone from "Guatamala" to "Guatapeor".

    Where you are way wrong is to believe that once these clowns get to control power and to control the armies in their respective countries that there is a way to be able to get them out of power through democratic means. They will be no better political operator able to defeat them.

    This fact has already happened to Venezuela (and starting to multiply in other countries in the region) and you don't seem to understand it yet, that's why I replied to you this way.

    Is like I laugh at the Venezuelan opposition in Globovision and all those Venezuelan exiles that come on the TV programs here in Miami now a days still thinking that they're going to be able to get rid of Hugo Chavez via democratic means.

    They are living in fantasy island.

  • Caballero,

    please stop drinking the KoolAid. Fact is that this is not a coup - as you and your fellow koolaiders keep insisting. According to all reports, Honduran Law was followed to a tee. Again, I asked for responses today with the use of bullshit or smoke and mirrors.

  • Was going to post pretty much the same thing Val just put up. Why are some of us losing sight of the fact that Zelaya was/is in clear violation of Honduran law? It's not like if the United States is sending troops over there to help keep Zelaya out, but by siding with Zelaya, we look every bit like the role of supporting a dictator and not supporting those in Honduras who are protecting their own constitution.

  • charles_e_fromage

    Let's agree, for the sake of debate, that Zelaya was in violation of the law by calling for the referendum. Does that mean that another branch of government automatically has the power to remove him as President? I don't know, but I have my doubts. Lots of politicians here break laws / have felony convictions, they've remained in office.

    Anyway, I'm not sure it really matters. The same Liberal Party of Honduras is still in charge, isn't it? Is this really much more than just rearranging the chairs on deck? What is the new guy really like? Anyone here know?

  • Lori G.

    The Supreme court ruled Zelaya's move to envoke the vote was unconstititutional. Zelaya, refused to acknoledge the ruling and said that he'd go on and hold his vote, there by BREAKING THE LAW. Congress ordered his arrest and IMPEACHMENT, remember that word? For those that think that it was impossible to conduct the vote, with the Supreme Court ruling against it and all the military chief's refusing to take the materials needed and deliver them to the voting stations, must be told that the president of Venezuela, had sent an airplane with personnel and all the material needed to hold the vote, and deliver the ballots all over Honduras despite the Supreme Court's ruling.

    Had the milatary gone in and murdered Zelaya, then he'd be another leftist martyr like the one they have made of Chilean wanna-be dictator Allende, who had 36,000 international leftists from the Soviet Union & Cuba running around Chile killing and doing what not, under his rule and hiding behind the fact that he originally had been democratically elected.

    IMPEACHMENT is a practice that we can use here in the United State to OUST a democratically elected president, and nobody has ever dared to call it a coup. Why is this word not being used to describe what was done in Honduras?

    ZELAYA WAS MOVING TO BREAK THE LAW EVEN AFTER THE SUPREME COURT RULED HIS ACTIONS WITH THE HELP OF A FOREIGN HEAD OF STATE. Why is that not being reported? Why is it ok for the USA to opine in the internal affairs of Honduras and not Cuba's or Venezuela's? Is this not obvious to anyone with a pulse?

  • Honey

    Lori G.,
    All that you say is obvious to anyone who deals in facts and logic. But those who prefer to maintain their prejudices and explain away all inconsistencies for one reason or another - cult of personality worship or liberalism's infallibility - will accept all sorts of devil's advocate behavior to rationalize what they refuse to face as being simple facts and logic.

  • Val is right.

    My father is a former "company" man & Brigadista which has conducted business in Honduras for over 40 years and was in Tegucigalpa just last week, with our family friend, the new Canciller, Dr. Enrique Ortez Colindres.

    That Sandinista, Castro boot licking scumbag Patricia Rodas has been rightly arrested.

    You are correct Mel Zelaya had disavowed various Supreme Court decisions, went against the will of the national congress, violated orders of the election tribunal board and fired the head of the Joint Chief of Staff and the Defense Minister illegally because they would NOT go along with his sham referendum.

    Note that this would alter the constitution so he could perpetuate himself in power, a la Chavez.

    Of course Obama denounced this, one of his ideological soulmates was ousted by an Armed Forces which did so via a supreme court order and with the complete backing of the congress. (which by the way is majority of the ex President's party)

    Thank God today Roberto Micheletti is leading Honduras and I will leave you with this beautiful quote:

    "Nobody, not Barack Obama and much less Hugo Chavez, has any right to threaten this country."

    Viva Honduras Libre!!!

    God Bless the glorious armed services of Honduras which upheld the honor and decency of a nation which refused to condemn itself to darkness and tyranny.

    Y le puedo decir con informacion bien personal que le entraron y sacaron a golpes el "embajador" de Cuba y Venezuela, aparte de expulsar los de Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, etc.

  • charles_e_fromage

    Lori G., If they actually ordered his IMPEACHMENT then that is a different matter.

    But I have not seen that word used in any news reports, not even the ones linked to on Babalu. Can you provide a link, as I must have missed it.

    Can anyone answer my other question. Is the new President / leader of the Liberal Party of Honduras much different from Zelaya?

  • Charles,

    This IS an impeachment. His own supreme court, his own government, his own party and his own military sought and did remove him from power legally and constitutionally. WHAT THE HELL ELSE CAN YOU CALL IT?

  • Lori G.

    Honey,

    It is a sad state of affair.

    Caballero de Paris,

    By your words, I can assume that when the House Judiciary Committee issued three articles of impeachment against Nixon in 1974, they were also guilty of a "blatantly anti-democratic putsch", or no?

    We know that Nixon resigned before going through a public trial, but it does not erase the move for impeachment.

    Why are the actions by the Honduras Congress, being called a coup, and the equivalent of our Speaker of the House, who is in Honduras, 1st in line for the presidency according to their constitution and is not a mililtary official.

    How can the fact that there are Venezuelans right now, as we read here, in Honduras creating civil unrest, be overlooked and not seen and reported for what they are, which is the REAL "blatantly anti-democratic putsch" being perpetrated with the support of a foreign head of state, Hugo Chavez.

    This is all so unfathomable to me that it feels like I'm in another demension or alternate reality.

  • Lori G.

    Charles,

    So if the media doesn't call it an impeachment, you choose not to see it as that, although that is exactly what it is? So whatever you're told to say or think, is what you'll say and think? You won't look the facts on your own and come to your own conclusion? You'll think whatever some talking head tells you to think on the tube or a newspaper?

    I personally think they should have dragged his ass to a congressional trial and try him for ilegal and unconstitutional actions, and I completely support his distitution/impeachment. They chose to drag his silly ass out of his home and drop him off in the middle of a Costa Rican tarmac in pajamas, well that is their perogative. I think he should thank his lucky stars he's not feeding the fish somewhere at the bottom of the Ocean and that the people who arrested him just wanted him out and not dead.

  • caballerodeparis1

    I'm sorry, I can't find anywhere that Zelaya was impeached. Can someone post that reference? My understanding is that there was discussion of impeaching Zelaya but that the military coup pre-empted that process.

  • caballero,

    Dude, you are on real thin ice here. YOu keep repeating "coup" and "military coup" as if it is a given, all evidence to the contrary. And, should the word "coup" be appropriate here, it would and could only be used to describe Zelaya's actions against his own government. He did, in fact violate the constitution. He did in fact violate the law. he did in fact violate the Supreme courts rulings. He did, in fact, seek to usurp absolute power while undermining the constitution with the aiding and abetting from a foreign government. He did, in fact, oust military personnel from their positions. All of these as a means to an end.

    So, you know what? I agree with you. There WAS A COUP in Honduras. Good thing the pluralistic and democratic Honduran government recognized it as such and took the preemptive measures it took to prevent it.

    You know, thats the problem with Obama lovers and liberals in general and what infuriates me the most about same: You have absolutely no integrity in your beliefs and little, if any, in your arguments. Please do not come here again and spew - almost verbatim - the snake oil salesman, boilerplate talking points of this US administration. Any reasonable person with an ounce of shame and without hypocrisy recognizes bullshit when they see or hear it.

  • caballerodeparis1

    Val,

    Was he impeached or not? Simple question, man. If you have the reference I would appreciate seeing it. If you don't, that's fine too.

  • charles_e_fromage

    Hi again Lori G. ... someone can be accused of a crime they obviously committed, that doesn't mean they were convicted ... you agree with me on that, don't you?

    Likewise someone can be justly removed from office, that doesn't mean they were officially impeached.

    In America, impeachment means something very specific when you are talking about a President. I don't know the word means in a technical legal sense in Honduras, or if they even have the impeachment process.

    All I ever want is accurate and factual reporting, that does not rely on loaded words to inflame passions.

    Anyway, I completely agree that every branch of government wanted the President removed. I'm not denying that. Time will tell if the new Liberal Party leader / President is any better.

  • The attorney general called for Congress to impeach him on Thursday, last week.

  • Charles,

    You are living proof of why I abhor liberals and the liberal mindset. We all know perfectly well what would have happened if the pluralistic and democratic government of Honduras, all three Branches, had not removed Zelaya immediately from power.

  • charles_e_fromage

    Val, why do you have a problem with my desire that people use words correctly? Or that I check that they do? I never said word one about his removal from office being a bad thing. In fact, I said it was good.

    Anyway, here's another summary of the Honduras situation from someone with contacts there:

    http://archive.midrange.com/cpf0000/200906/msg02840.html

    My wife is from Honduras, and we've been talking to friends and family from there.

    Mel Zelaya was the "golpista", certainly not the Armed Forces. Nobody in the Armed Forces had any position of power at any moment, they only obeyed orders from the Court.

    CNNE and Univision are not reporting the truth in this, and the English language networks are no doubt messing it up big time. I told CNNE they should respect the Honduran people and their point of view.

    Mel Zelaya was throwing his own coup d'etat and his own Attorney General (executive branch) with the Supreme Court and the Legislature removed him. Based on causes listed in the Honduran Constitution, the Congress voted unanimously to remove him from power.

    1.Zelaya did his own coup with the mask of "referendum". But this referendum was whether to call a Constitutional Convention, which the Honduran constitution says has to be called by the Congress.

    2.When the Supreme Court said it was unconstitutional, he continued it anyway. The Election Board obeyed the court and refused his orders to do it anyway, so he called it a "survey" and used the more pliant and friendly (to him) Statistics Department to do it anyway.

    3.Since he couldn't get a print shop in Honduras to do it, and since he was acting illegally, he ordered these printed ballots from VENEZUELA. Hah. He got his loyal paid followers, maybe a few hundred, to march with him to where they were to take them anyway, which he was not able to accomplish.

    So after he managed to distribute some of these illegal documents to various polling sites around the country, the Supreme Court ordered his arrest. Some say it was one judge.

    4.The news media is swallowing the spit from Zelaya's mouth, because he says he didn't resign.

    In my opinion, when the guys in uniforms came to execute the arrest order, he requested exile instead. Glad to be rid of a problem, they treated it as a voluntary political asylum request. BUT, again in my opinion, the price for exile was to sign the resignation.

    5.At least one CNNE reporter divulged at 6 PM that they were getting flooded with emails from Hondurans, NOT ONE defending Zelaya. They never mentioned anything about the emails again.

    If this is a coup d'etat, it is the first one that I know of in the history of Latin America that has overwhelming support from all sectors of the country. Poor, rich, professional, blue collar, agricultural, all of them...

    --Alan

    P.S. Friends in Honduras are telling us that the first air presence that got them so nervous were five jets with Venezuelan Air Force markings. They tell us that they quickly took off when Honduran jets appeared close by....

    Some Hondurans are talking about breaking curfew to demonstrate in favor of the actions of the Attorney General, the Court, the Congress, and the obedient Congress.

    In its session today, the Congress gave a rousing standing applause on three occasions during deliberations. Two of them were for enthusiastic praise for the constitutional behavior of the Armed Forces. The other one was a hot, emotional declaration that Honduras would defend itself against threats.

  • For those having a problem with facts:
    From Encarta dictionary:

    Impeach: cast somebody out of public office; to remove somebody such as a president or a judge from a public office because of having committed serious crimes and misdemeanors or because of other gross misconduct.

  • caballerodeparis1

    So he was never impeached. The military stepped in to remove him from office before the Congress could go through the process established in their constitution to remove the President from office. I just read the Honduran constitution this evening and it seems that the Congress would have had ample grounds for removing him from office legally (including the fact that revisions to the term limits law are expressly forbidden). Never mind that it appears that Zelaya's insistence on revoking the term-limits provisions of the constitution also alienated his own party and left him as a remarkably weak political actor who would not likely have survived an impeachment proceeding. Instead the military picked him up in the middle of the night and threw him out of the country leaving any country with respect for the rule of law (the US, for example) with few options but to rightly call the ouster illegal. They created a martyr out of a man on his last legs. Fucking geniuses. Meanwhile, in Argentina the Kirchner clown show seems to be coming to an end at the hands of voters not soldiers. Imagine that.

  • FreedomForCuba

    Well Charles, you see now how the MSM and the Obama administration are handling this issue and misinforming the American people while siding with the real coup being cooked by Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez with the OAS and UN help.

    Since you’re closer to this issue by virtue of being married to a Honduran national you’ll realize now how much trouble Latin-America is of completely being taken over by the Castro/Chavez/Obama axis.

  • FreedomForCuba

    The reality is that Honduras is in real trouble now because Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and their new accomplice, the President of the United States of America Barack Hussein Obama (the same President that decided not to intervene in behalf of those Iranians being killed by the Mullahs) have decided to intervene in Central America and push on the Honduran people another Marxist regime with Mel Zelaya as the head of state.

    I only hope and pray that the Honduran people, their government institutions and armed forces don’t blink because if they do is all over for them.

    This is just as bad (or worse) as Jimmy Carter allowing the Sandinistas to get to power in Nicaragua thirty years ago.

    We’re certainly living in some crazy times, I wonder when all this insanity will end and when the American people are going to finally wake-up and realize what kind of individual they have for President.

    He surely makes me puke in disgust.

  • Lori G.

    Caballero de Paris,

    The military did not act on their own when they took Zelaya, they were acting on orders from Congess.

    Charles,

    They wouldn't call it impeachment in Honduras, because as you know they don't speak English, but it is the closest term to what they did. What has been done in Honduras, by the military and under orders from congress, is not a coup. They removed the president from power and they've sworn in the "Speaker of the House" until the November elections. Plain & simple.

    I choose to call it an impeachment and that is how I'll see it. Had the military taken power after removing Zelaya, and had they torn congress apart and removed the supreme court justices, then you can call it a coup, but all governmental institutions have remained as they were, and the executive branch is now in the hands of the next in command according to their constitution.

    ZELAYA HAD A FOREIGN HEAD OF STATE INTRODUCING PROPAGANDA, ILEGAL BALLOTS & PERSONNELL INTO HONDURAS! For Pete's sake, WTF is going on around the world, they just allowed Cuba back into OAS, but they're moving to ban Honduras for having what they call an ilegitimate president. What the hell?!?!?! Since when are the Castros legitimate? WHY THE DOUBLE STANDARD?

  • FreedomForCuba

    Lori G.

    I share your frustration. What is happening is insanity at it's worst.

  • Honey

    I still have the sneaking suspicion that these characters who question and parse words to upend facts are plants sent here to disrupt our morale.
    But worse there is complete indifference to this whole affair among the American people except for conservatives.
    What is it going to take to wake up this country?

  • caballerodeparis1

    Honey,

    Be vewy vewy qwiet, we're hunting wabbit.

    Seriously, a plant? Your morale is disrupted by a debate on a blog? Sweet Jesus.

  • Honey

    Debates never worry me. I can handle debates.

    But when facts are presented and then ignored for the convenience of a certain prejudiced position, it is troubling that people who "argue" that way also vote.

    I am surrounded by people who think they are so right, but cannot abide allowing facts and logic to cloud their strange conclusions.
    Generally, I find your contributions here a bore. You sound like a twelve year old. You love to parade your cleverness, but that is seldom what I find in your contributions.

  • caballerodeparis1

    Honey, it's difficult to continue arguing with a person who assumes that anyone who doesn't agree with him/her is a plant for the DGI. But I'm on the train headed to the City and have some time to kill. From what i can tell, Zelaya was never impeached. Fact. He was deposed by the military. Fact. My argument here is that he likely would have been impeached with much less international hue and cry than what his ouster by soldiers has produced. And that by short-circuiting the process of removal by legal means his enemies in Honduras made a terrible tactical error. Even a 12 year old can understand that. BTW, if by clever you mean that I dont take what you say at face value, then guilty as charged. You operate as if your merely saying something, even if it lacks any basis in fact, should be enough to win the argument. That's pretty rich.

  • caballero,

    See, this comment of yours is the perfect example of what we're all talking about. It is misrepresentation of the facts to a tee.

    He was deposed by the military.

    That is incorrect. The military was acting on orders from the legislature and the Supreme Court. They did not establish a military leadership upon deposing Zelaya. they acted as a police force as is the way the military in Honduras historically does, and followed the rule of law and orders from their pluralistic and democratic government.

    There is ample information on this blog and on the net that clearly proves this was not a military coup yet you continue to parrot the rumor, for whatever agenda you may have. You can keep parsing words and repeating the same disingenuous remarks over and over and over again, but the facts are the facts, and you are ignorant of same at best.

    And, in all honesty, I have to agree with honey, you love to parade your cleverness, but anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that you are just farting higher than your ass. Moreover, I find your attitude incredibly arrogant and your commentary, for the most part, overwhelmingly pedantic.

  • charles_e_fromage

    "Since you’re closer to this issue by virtue of being married to a Honduran national ..."

    FreedomForCuba, that wasn't me ... that was the guy whose blog post I was quoting.

  • caballerodeparis1

    Val,

    I'm sorry you feel that way. Despite the fact that many bloggers on this site refer to their opponents as "pussies," "idiots," "assholes," "dicks," and, my personal favorite, "fucktards," I try to avoid name-calling and stick to the issues. You are wrong that there wasn't a coup in Honduras and you have let your hatred for Chavez y Compania blind you to the fact that deposing Zelaya by force was a terrible error. If you took a step back you would see that I'm right. BTW, I'm not alone in this view and it's not just the MSM. Here is Alvaro Vargas Llosa-he of "El Manuel del Perfecto Idiota Latinoamericano" and demystifyer of El Che--on the events in Honduras. I guess he's just parroting too. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/30Vargasllosa.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=llosa&st=cse

  • Caballero,

    I wont address you on this issue again after this.

    The problem with your argument, as well as Vargas-LLosa's, is that the premise is wrong. From the onset you both fail to understand that in a democratic society, there must be a balance of power. thus like the US, the need from different branches of government, each overseeing the other. In this case, the judicial and legislative branches of the Honduran government recognized that the executive branch, ie Zelaya, was acting extra-judiciously and against the constitution. moreover, they recognized that zelaya was, in fact, not only acting illegally, but actively working to destabilize or destroy the constitution while actively collaborating for same with a foreign nation. That in and of itself would be considered an act of treason, apart from its illegality, and would rightly be considered a coup.

    From wiki:

    In Coup d'État: A Practical Handbook, military historian Edward Luttwak says: “A coup consists of the infiltration of a small, but critical, segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder”, thus, armed force (either military or paramilitary) is not a defining feature of a coup d’État.

    Technically speaking, Zelaya's action would abrogate the country's constitution in and of itself and thus, technically, "displace the government form it's control". But let's say, for arguments sake, that this could have and should have been dealt with through the Honduran courts.

    However, when Zelaya used his supporters to storm the military locations where the already illegal ballots and paperwork were stored, by order of his own government, he did, in fact, instigate a coup d'etat.

    The Honduran government was not, under any circumstances, responsible for a coup, they acted, and rightly so, to prevent one.

  • Mr. Mojito

    What the hell is Alvaro Vargas Llosa thinking ?

    His Dad must be ashamed.

  • Mambí

    Caballero: You're WRONG!! Val has laid it out very well as to what a coup actually is. This was not a military takeover a la the 60's and 70's when military juntas actually ran the country. Your pig-headed fixation with calling it an 'undemocratic military coup', in spite of overwhelming evidence, is a sad commentary, as you cling to defending the indefensible.

    Just so you know, Obama has been told that what happened to Zelaya was perfectly legal.

  • Larry- Yahoo contact info:

    Investor relations, (doesn't hurt to let the money guys know what is going on)

    Yahoo investor relations: http://yhoo.client.shareholder.com/contactus.cfm

    News feedback contact form:

    http://tinyurl.com/n3msmc