President's Jet Blocked in Honduras

From Zelaya's Wiki entry:

The Economist gave Zelaya mixed reviews for his first year in office, saying that "Despite success in fulfilling some of his campaign promises [...] Zelaya's lack of a coherent programme has limited the government's ability to address Honduras's long-standing problems," and that "introducing far-reaching reforms will be difficult" in the face of vigorous opposition and "simmering social tensions."[26] At the time of his ouster, the newsmagazine said "Mr Zelaya's presidency has been marked by a rise in crime, corruption scandals and economic populism".[27]

In 2008, Zelaya's popular approval dropped amid the 20072008 world food price crisis and worsening drug-related violence that gave Honduras one of the highest homicide rates in Latin America. [28]

On April 1 2009, Zelaya announced desire to start monitoring all cellular phones in the country. The highly regarded National Committee for Human Rights (CODEH) has called the wiretapping "police terrorism" and has warned that they could lead to the formation of a national police state.[29]

Zelaya refused to give money to National Electoral Tribunal and the National Persons Registry, which oversee elections in Honduras. It is believed that the reason was to "financially asphyxiate the electoral process".[29]...

Latin American nations as well as the United States, Spain, France, and others, have publicly condemned the forced removal of Zelaya and many have labeled it as a coup d'tat. U.S. President Barack Obama said "We believe that the coup was not legal and that President Zelaya remains the President of Honduras."[51][52] Hugo Chavez threatened to invade Honduras.[53] Micheletti's government says to have received support from Israel and Taiwan.[54] UnoAmerica (Union of Democratic American Organizations), an international organization founded by Venezuelan opposition organizer Alejandro Pea-Esclusa, has recognized Micheletti and the new government. [55] Venezuela has said it would suspend oil shipments, and Honduras's neighbors -- El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua -- announced that they would stop overland trade.[56] A one-page United Nations resolution, passed by acclamation in the 192-member body, condemned the removal of Mr. Zelaya as a coup and demanded his "immediate and unconditional restoration" as president.[57] The resolution calls "firmly and categorically on all states to recognise no government other than that" of Mr Zelaya.[58]

...and here it is. I thought something seemed a little weird about Chavez and Obama being on the same side for this one:

www.venezuelanalysis.com

Another major source of funding in Honduras is USAID, providing over US$ 50 millon annually for "democracy promotion" programs, which generally supports NGOs and political parties favorable to U.S. interests, as has been the case in Venezuela, Bolivia and other nations in the region. The Pentagon also maintains a military base in Honduras in Soto Cano, equipped with approximately 500 troops and numerous air force combat planes and helicopters. Foreign Minister Rodas has stated that she has repeatedly tried to make contact with the U.S. Ambassador in Honduras, Hugo Llorens, who has not responded to any of her calls thus far. The modus operandi of the coup makes clear that Washington is involved. Neither the Honduran military, which is majority trained by U.S. forces, nor the political and economic elite, would act to oust a democratically elected president without the backing and support of the U.S. government.

ok what I linked to in #2 is from the day one of postcards from the revolution.

from sunday's entry:

A confirmed meeting is taking place tomorrow in Washington, D.C., between President Zelaya and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Zelaya is expected to fly early tomorrow to the US capital. Clinton will most likely seek to negotiate some kind of agreement between the coup forces and President Zelaya in order to ensure his safe return and reinstate constitutional order.

Nevertheless, there are many concerns that Washington is looking to support its allies in Honduras, primarily those in the business and military sector who have been heavily involved in this coup, while trying to "save face" and project a "positive" non-interventionist image of Obama in Latin America. However, many question the late response by the Obama administration to the military coup, now a week in the making, and the outright lack of condemnation by Obama and Clinton regarding human rights violations committed by the coup government and repression of press freedoms

The silence on both sides is deafening!

Obamabots don't want to believe that Black Jesus is channeling the ghost of Ronnie RayGun when it comes to Latin America policy...

...and the conservatives would probably like to use this as a reason to attack Obama, but that would mean a tacit condemnation of decades' worth of oppression and subversion in the region, as brought to a frightening crescendo by the RayGun admin!

This latest "coup" bears the M.O. of our military (for the most recent and similar example, see: Venezuela, 2002). Unsurprising, to say the least.

The Obama Admin does fervently "Hope" you won't notice the Honduran regime "Change", because they're doing their best to be at least little quieter about the situation than were their predecessors!

Say one thing...do another. Foreign democracies only count if those stupid foreigners vote the "correct" way. And the imperialist march continues. Classic.

Another reason I'm glad I didn't vote for a major party nitwit...

Its very unlikely we had anything to do with it. The central american military forces are perfectly capable of launching coups on their own.

www.csmonitor.com

Too bad that the CIA couldn't shoot down that Obama backed commie's plane.

there is only one thing to do with this story and thats to list the three main supporters of this guy

chavez
castro
obama

nuff said

BUT WHOEVER said I stopped that soon

I read not long ago an article in the houston paper that had parts of their constitution printed out and it seems that the court, the legislature, with the help of the army did nothing more than to follow the law as specified when someone tried to become just another castro or chavez

WELL NOW I remember why barry is for the expresident.
since he doesnt have to follow a constitution, why should they???

hey BARRY...nice job of NOT meddling in another countries affairs...

Its very unlikely we had anything to do with it. The central american military forces are perfectly capable of launching coups on their own.

#5 | Posted by deadarmadillo

Why do you call defending their constitution a coups? Seems to me the ousted president was trying to bring off a coup by ignoring their constitution.

#10 | Posted by Sniper

Because the military dragging the duly elected President of a country out of bed in the middle of the night and spiriting him out of the country is a coup.

If he was violating the Constitution (and it sounds like he was) then he could have been arrested a tried civilly, and removed from office if found guilty of the charges.

The Honduran President was democratically elected. If the People wanted him removed from office they should have done so in a constitutional manner. A coup by the military is never a legitimate means of removing one president and empowering another.

Mod,

His extension of personal power was deemed illegitimate given the constituion and their supreme court's interpretation of such.

He was forcibly removed (possibly overtly-so) but was exciled in lieu of imprisonment or assissination. Further, he wasn't replaced by some installed-dictator, but his replacement has been deferred to a new election.

Formerly elected leaders are supposed to step-down when their laws dictate such.

Would you have accepted a 3rd Bush term under similar circumstances?

I suspect not - nor would I.

Formerly elected leaders are supposed to step-down when their laws dictate such.

#13 | Posted by JeffJ

His term wasn't up.

He did not have the support of the military (obviously) to keep him in office beyond the end of his term.

The Supreme Court declared his proposed referendum unconstitutional.

The Attorney General refused to support Zelaya or the referendum.

He could have been arrested/charged with the illegal acts and faced a trial on the level and in the open, then removed from office by civil authority.

Coup.

JeffJ: The fact of the matter is that he had NOT done an "extension of personal power" as you claim. Rather, he was putting the issue of increased terms up for a democratic vote. He was willing to let the People decide.

Now I don't like this guy or the fact that he is one of Chavez' little bitches. But he is the elected President of Honduras. And the military staging a coup to replace him is not a legitimate means of changing leadership.

Rogue and Moder8,

I don't for a moment pretend that this is 'by-the-book'.

However, It is disingenuous of either one of you to insinuate (I am not accusing either of you of such) that such action constitutes a "coup".

It is disingenuous of either one of you to insinuate (I am not accusing either of you of such) that such action constitutes a "coup".

#16 | Posted by JeffJ

I think it is more disingenuous to claim that it wasn't.

Whether or not the guy had done something illegal and deserved to be removed from office is completely irrelevant. He may well have.

But the method used when civil alternatives were available = coup, plain and simple.

#17 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

Had Bush taken the exact same measures to preserve his own power, to what degree would your consterbnation have been?

Sorry - Consternation

Had Bush taken the exact same measures to preserve his own power, to what degree would your consterbnation have been?

#18 | Posted by JeffJ

Its a pretty silly hypothetical, but I don't anticipate the US Marines would have dragged him out of the White House in the dead of night and forced him to another country.

The court system and the Congress would have done their duty.

You can't maintain power illegally without the support of the military. Zelaya didn't have that so there was NO reason he couldn't have been dealt with by civil authorities.

Rogue,

He was entrenched.

He had a military all his own.

I understand disagreeing with the more extreme measures taken, but I feel this is a bigger distraction of the bigger issue - was he the legitimate ruler of Honduras - the best evidence available suggests 'No'.

"The best available evidence says no...."

The punishment assigned, exile, appears extra-juridicial and to lack any semblance of due process.

Coup.

was he the legitimate ruler of Honduras - the best evidence available suggests 'No'.

#21 | Posted by JeffJ

Yes, he was. At least until the end of the term to which he was legally elected, or until removed from office by civilian means for being tried and convicted of any crimes.

He had a military all his own.

#21 | Posted by JeffJ

I haven't seen anything to that effect. How, then, was the army able to just walk in and take him?

JeffJ: This seems like a no-brainer. The guy was the elected President of Honduras. His term was not yet over. The military came in the middle of the night, rousted him, stuck him on a plane, sent him to another country, and then appointed one of their cronies to take over. it's a coup. (A coup by any other name stinks just as bad.)

Nothing to see here. Honduras can take care of thier own business. The United States Of Ameritard should learn to mind its own business, and take care of problems in this failing country. How about all of the out of control wooly haired types commiting atrocities in this country?

Rogue and Mod,

The guy was clearly attempting to subvert his country's constitution in a blatant attempt to cement his own power long-term.

I understand both of your assertions that, at best, the other factions of the Honduras government went to the extreme when dealing with this. However, what this guy was attempting to do is pretty obvious.

What was done in Honduras was perfectly legal and according to law in Honduras. If this is a coup, then it is unlike any other in history. The former president is alive and safe, although he is out of power and in another country. An acting president has been named per the constitution, and presidential elections will still be held this fall. Also, the differing political parties have come together to support the removal of the former president. As it stands, the only government leaders labeling this a coup are the ex-president himself and leaders of other countries, especially those with socialist or Marxist leanings.

Sandinheadmorgue,

Maybe you missed the parts where his own party did not approve of his leadership anymore, which supported a congressional vote to install congressional leader Roberto Micheletti as interim president. Or the fact that he insisted on forcing through a vote over term limits in direct disregard to their SC? Or that Zelaya is opposed by all branches of the Honduran gov...

I know you missed this! (You miss a lot don't you?)Another senior U.S. administration official expressed frustration with Zelaya, saying the ousted Honduran leader rejected advice from the United States and others not to press for the constitutional change and also not to try to return to Honduras on Sunday while the situation remained volatile.

apnews.myway.com

#29 | Posted by DavetheWave

Maybe YOU missed the part where I specifically said the guy may well have broken the law and deserve to be removed from office.

My issue is with the way he was removed, and by whom.

By the way - your own linked article refers to this as a "military coup". Did you "miss" that?

For the good of the planet...A bullet would have saved so much energy...all that CO2 and CO. And all the hot air generated in D.C.

I'm guessing D.C. is "OK" with Zel. is because they want the same thing...www.end22.com

The Honduran President was democratically elected. If the People wanted him removed from office they should have done so in a constitutional manner. A coup by the military is never a legitimate means of removing one president and empowering another.

#12 | Posted by moder8

They have TERM LIMITS and he tried to take the job for life.

How should they deal with a dictator?

They have TERM LIMITS and he tried to take the job for life.

How should they deal with a dictator?

#33 | Posted by Sniper

Operative term - he was trying... had not succeeded. If what he was doing was illegal he should have been charged and tried by civil authority, and if convicted, removed from office. When the military comes in in the dead of night, seizes the duly elected head of government and spirits him out of the country = coup.

"How should they deal with a dictator...?"

Well, I don't think they allow him to circle the Honduran National Airport.

Jeez. The only message from this is that Honduras is a strange place. That this was a coup is just common sense.

I was in Paraguay in 1989 during the coup which overthrew General Stroessner after 34 years in power. The similarities between the behavior of the Paraguayan military in that instance and the Honduran military in this instance are remarkable. In both cases the military waited until the leader was vulnerable, made a lightning strike to apprehend the leader, and then immediately safely shipped to a neighboring country.

I understand that most of us are sympathetic to the removal of the Honduran President given his politics and his ambitions. But to say that this was not a coup is silly.

My issue is with the way he was removed, and by whom.

#30 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

and I am sure you have no problem with our president aligning himslef with chavez and castro on this issue...that speaks VOLUMNES TO me...

and there was no blood spilled and only one person arrested. want to make a wager that if the other way around....if he were fighting stay IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THIER OWN CONSTITUTION>..that there would be blood and arrests..

and the person who was out in the street who got killed I guess you will point to but I dont

"I understand that most of us are sympathetic to the removal of the Honduran President given his politics and his ambitions"

We are? Speak for yourself, buddy.

and I am sure you have no problem with our president aligning himslef with chavez and castro on this issue...that speaks VOLUMNES TO me...

#37 | Posted by afkabl2

Right, Ish... in addition to EVERY other country in the western hemisphere, and the entire EU, among others.

Your blinders are on a bit tight today.

"speaks VOLUMNES(sic)"

#37 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-07-07 11:28 AM | Reply | Flag: indeed

Honduras? Who gives a fuck?
Seriously, who? What does Honduras do for anyone? What difference has Honduras made? Fuck them.

Your blinders are on a bit tight today.

#39 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

actually I think that I shrunk my briefs in the last load of laundry

speaks VOLUMNES(sic)"

#37 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-07-07 11:28 AM | Reply | Flag: indeed

#40 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2009
funny...remind me of this later and maybe I wont forget to laugh..

Seriously, who? What does Honduras do for anyone? What difference has Honduras made? Fuck them.

#41 | Posted by 101Chairborne

I guess they do since they can see what chavez is doing to those people and they have seen the bullshit from castro for the past 50 years and the killing and imprisonment he has had to do to keep those cigars coming..

my guess is they see that and then see this guy about to do the same thing
and the REALLY STRANGE thing here is all of the libs here and around the world backing this 'attempted' takeover against their constitution.

it does make one wonder...

and the REALLY STRANGE thing here is all of the libs here and around the world backing this 'attempted' takeover against their constitution.

it does make one wonder...

Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-07-07 11:56 AM

Blinders, Ish, blinders.

Your contention here is false and you know it. Nearly everyone, including myself had said maybe the guy needed to be removed. The problem is that doing so with a military coup is wrong.

"The problem is that doing so with a military coup is wrong."

signed

Ignorant & Arrogant Americans.

Talk about blinders, you know the Supreme Court had confiscated the ballots, the thug stole them back, you know the Supreme Court ordered the ousting. The military was an instrument of the government, it didn't act alone, and you know that.

The Supreme Court was worried that the "president" would fire the military commanders again, that an arrest could not be made. Knowing full well that if they did just arrest him it might lead to civil war, as some military commanders were not on board with the civilian authority. There had been a run up of tensions to the weekend over this issue. The Supreme court and Congress acted within thier right, and duty to preserve and protect thier rule of law.

You are the one with blinders.

When the Chief Executive is in violation of the Constitution, it's good to see that the nation's armed forces ignore their CinC, and execute the laws.

Operative term - he was trying...

#34 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

And if he succeded, then what?

I guess you believe the 'officials' job is to chalk the bodies after the carnage.

And if he succeded, then what?

I guess you believe the 'officials' job is to chalk the bodies after the carnage.

#48 | Posted by Sniper

I don't know why you can't seem to address the points at hand.

1. He was duly elected and still serving his legal term of office.

2. He did not have the support of the military to keep himself in power past his current term.

3. He was accused of unlawfully arranging a referendum.

Why couldn't he have been charged with, and prosecuted for the alleged crime(s) by civil authorities and duly removed from office if convicted? If the legislative and judiciary branches opposed him, and the military did not support him that should have been possible, don't you think?

"I guess they do since they can see what chavez is doing to those people"

Funny thing is how he keeps winning elections, rtard.

"Why couldn't he have been charged with, and prosecuted for the alleged crime(s) by civil authorities and duly removed from office if convicted? If the legislative and judiciary branches opposed him, and the military did not support him that should have been possible, don't you think?"

The latest which I have read is that the various segments of government declared his actions illegal. But they had no way to enforce their decision and he wasn't agreeing to it. So they asked the military for assistance. The military, this being Honduras, acted per their playbook - and staged a coup.

Lots of premature activity by all parties. Will be interesting how it plays out.