Obama Administration Still Fails To Recognize Honduran Government
Guest Post By Leonidas
Leonidas is a frequent, right of center commenter on The Moderate Voice and has been invited as a Guest Voice.
**********
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) has released a new report on the ousting of former President Manuel Zelaya.
Among its findings:
Available sources indicate that the judicial and legislative branches applied constitutional and statutory law in the case against President Zelaya in a manner that was judged by the Honduran authorities from both branches of the government to be in accordance with the Honduran legal system.
However, removal of President Zelaya from the country by the military is in direct
violation of the Article 102 of the Constitution, and apparently this action is currently under investigation by the Honduran authorities.
So his removal from the Presidency was Constitutional, but his removal from the country was not.
Yet the Obama administration has still failed to recognize the government of Honduras as the rightful legal government of the Country, and the administration has cut aid by $30 million and threatened to cut another $200 million. This is about 2% of the Honduran GDP.
Furthermore the Washington Examiner reports:
Do the facts matter? Fat chance. The administration is standing by its “coup” charge and 10 days ago, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went so far as to sanction the country’s independent judiciary. The U.S. won’t say why, but its clear the court’s sin is rejecting a U.S.-backed proposal to restore Mr. Zelaya to power.
The upshot is that the U.S. is trying to force Honduras to violate its own constitution and is also using its international political heft to try to interfere with the country’s independent judiciary.
Hondurans are worried about what this pressure is doing to their country. Mr. Zelaya’s violent supporters are emboldened by the U.S. position. They deface some homes and shops with graffiti and throw stones and home-made bombs into others, and whenever the police try to stop them, they howl about their “human rights.”
But it may be that Americans should be even more concerned about the heavy-handedness, without legal justification, emanating from the executive branch in Washington. What does it say about Mr. Obama’s respect for the separation of powers that he would instruct Mrs. Clinton to punish an independent court because it did not issue the ruling he wanted?
Its time the Obama administration correct its failed position, and show a respect for the Rule of Law in other nations and their independent judiciaries.
195 Responses to “Obama Administration Still Fails To Recognize Honduran Government”
Agreed that JD may have jumped the gun a tad, but, one has to figure with a callsign like Manuel Piñeiro, and that picture for an Avatar, an call for civil insurrection as opposed to democratic election, there might be some sympathy from Manuel towards a Casto/Chavez style government there.
So what if there is?
The guy was the head of the Cuban Intelligence agency.
So? Oliver North was a leading figure in a cabal that defied the will of Congress and broke federal law to fund the Nicaraguan Contras, a sinister, unsavory far right organization that was responsible for widespread human rights abuses. And he (North) and the others with whom he worked did this by illegally selling arms to Iran and funneling the money to said Contras.
Would you suspect the integrity of someone who wore an Oliver North t-shirt, or who called himself Oliver North on a blog and used an Oliver North avatar?
Thank you! I had it in mind to make that very point, and you made it for me. Well done.
Then as I said previously, there might be some sympathy from Manuel towards a Casto/Chavez style government there. This is simply an observation, and like I also said,previously, it doesn't necessarily mean approval of all the activities that Manuel Piñeiro Losada participated in.
” it doesn't necessarily mean approval of all the activities that Manuel Piñeiro Losada participated in.”
How about, it doesn't necessairly mean approval of any of the actiities that Manual Piñeiro Losada participated in,
Does anyone have information to the contrary?
I think that was covered by my previous statement that ” it could be just a callsign chosen for some other reason”.
“Well, maybe, if you subscribe to the Richard Nixon school of thought about legality. I don't.”
Since in my reality Nixon was never the entire Supreme Court so this is a bit off point, and just strange.
“I am not claiming that the ruling did not occur. I am stating that the ruling no longer can be implemented because it was carried out illegitimately. Because the Honduran military overstepped its legal authority and ejected Manuel Zelaya from the country. The moment that happened, the legitimacy of the Supreme Court's ruling, even if it had existed before, was gone”
In your eyes maybe but you are not the one who counts. The Honduran Supreme Court is. An example in small would be the difference in illegal searches in different countries. In the US the info that the police acted illegally or outside their authority would invalidate any evidence gathered, In other countries the evidence would be allowed but police could face charges for their actions. While I may like the way I'm used to better that does not automatically mean any other way is wrong. Do you have a basis in Honduran law for your belief? And who would be the final word in the legality of the actions in the Honduran system? I realize you wouldn't admit you were on fire if I was the guy with the hose but come on..
“The Supreme Court's ruling was in reference to a set of actions that did not happen as prescribed. You cannot reasonably say that a sequence of actions authorized by the Supreme Court's ruling — first, that Pres. Zelaya should be taken into custody, upon presentation of an arrest warrant, on charges of violating the Constitution; then, that the next-in-line official, Micheletti, should take over as interim president; then that elections should be held in November — still applies and should be carried out as the ruling specified when the Honduran military went beyond the authority the ruling gave them and egregiously violated the law in the course of carrying out that first step in said series of actions authorized by the ruling. If you do that, you are allowing the law to be broken without consequence.”
The Supreme Court only had a hand in removing Zelaya. The impeachment was an entirely separate event and the succession went as designated in the constitution so the SC had no input on that and it's reasonable to conclude, even if you believe the SC removal would be a violation, that the entirely separate act by the congress was legal.
“In order to make the process legal again, you must *first* bring Pres. Zelaya back from exile and put him back into office as president. *Then* you can start again with the process.”
Let him back to arrest him? All he has to do is walk outside?
Leonidas: “I think that was covered by my previous statement that ” it could be just a callsign chosen for some other reason”.
No, it wasn't, by the very fact that the “all the activities” comments came after the “callsign” comment.
Just an observation. I'll let you have the last word.
Well, I'll retract my “I'm leaving forever!” post to clarify one item (an internet cliche, I know).
I have never heard of this site before. I discovered it by searching for “honduras” at Google News. It was the 4th or 5th link that I ran across, for that particular search.
I have friends and loved ones on the ground in Tegucigalpa. Some of them are Honduran citizens; some of them have traveled to Honduras to provide humanitarian assistance (medical and food) to the people of Honduras. My family is Latin American and a normal Sunday like today requires me to switch between English, Spanish and Portuguese to keep in touch with them over the phone.
If you're going to publish articles about what is going on in Latin America and if you want your site to appear in Google News, and you want the benefits of increased traffic from appearing in Google News, then you must also be prepared to accept the responsibilities and realities of what comes with that. I've worked as a freelance journalist throughout Latin America as well as the West Bank (the last time was during the re-occupation of Bethlehem by IDF in March 2002 — a full-fledged war zone and also the massacre at Jenin that occurred shortly thereafter) and the facts are that, as a journalist or a “commentator,” you ARE talking about the life and death of real people with real families.
I thought that if I posted a lengthy effort at discussion here, it would be taken seriously — at least as seriously as the situation we are talking about. However, nearly everything I wrote was ignored and what I got was ridiculous comments like: “The guy was a 2 bit thug with aspirations of dictatorship, tried to rig an election and got busted for it. Now he is also wearing a tin-foil hat imagining toxic gas and Israeli mercenaries.”
As it happens, your site was found by someone who is deeply involved in this situation. So, I know that even this off-the-cuff insult directed at President Zelaya is filled with inaccuracies and a lack of understanding of the situation. Zelaya was never accused of fixing an election. He was never “busted” for it. The assertion that chemical agents were introduced into the Brazilian Embassy has been confirmed and is now being reported by many major media outlets. CNN is one:
“An official with Brazil's Foreign Ministry told CNN there was some type of gas used in the area but could not confirm it was a nerve agent. Some embassy employees felt minor symptoms, said the official, who did not want his name used because that is foreign ministry protocol [...] Dr. Mauricio Castellano took air samples near the embassy after the attack and determined that the gas contained HCN, an abbreviation for hydrogen cyanide. HCN can cause dryness and burning of the throat, shortness of breath, convulsion, coma and cardiovascular collapse. [...] Andres Tamayo, who was with Zelaya at the embassy and identified himself as a priest, said the chemical attack came from three sources: neighboring houses that have been evacuated, a white truck that was seen near the embassy and a low-flying helicopter. 'This is a terrorist act,' Tamayo said [...] [Zelaya] showed photographs at the briefing that he said were of soldiers setting up gas-delivery systems and noise machines in neighboring yards.”
This evidence was sufficient for the Brazilian government as well as the United Nations and both of them have formally demanded that the illegal coup regime respect international law and end their attacks against the Brazilian Embassy. This will be the third time I have posted this article which explains in greater detail the criminal actions of the illegal golpistas:
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/3460/…
And finally, the Israeli mercenary that has been referred to is Yehuda Leitner, who has an office at Col. El Prado, Calle Golan, 3 Ave. Casa #2231, Tegucigalpa. Anyone familiar with Central American politics will recognize Mr Leitner's name, as he was heavily implicated in weapons and narcotics trafficking during the Iran-contra operations and in the years after. This clarification was provided by Patricia Rodas. President Zelaya had clarified to journalists in the Brazilian Embassy with him that this was the intelligence provided to him and Frances Robles of the Miami Herald (who I also know and have been in recent contact with about this story), chose to characterize (or, mis-quote) as she did — although, again, anyone familiar with Latin American politics should know that Ms Robles is well-known for this and has a well-known bias that appears in her reporting (not to mention the bias of the Miami Herald, in general). These reports are highly credible and very specific and, especially given Leitner's connections with the death squads that operated out of Honduras during the 80s, would only be taken lightly by someone who doesn't know about what is going on or is intentionally trying to misrepresent what is going on.
My point in taking even more of my time and explaining all of this in greater detail is to show that if you want to publish information for a global audience, you should expect and be prepared for people who know a lot about what is going on. This doesn't just go for Honduras — this goes for any story you publish about any situation in the world where people are being killed, raped, victims of chemical attacks, and so on.
If you really believe that it is appropriate “news” or “journalism” that your writer responds to detailed, well-articulated and well-documented criticisms with essentially something like “whatever, go put on your tin hat,” then I don't know what to say.
As someone who is on edge every moment that the telephone will ring and I will find out that a loved one has been killed by the criminal, illegal regime that is currently holding Honduras hostage, I find these immature responses by your so-called “commentator” to be inappropriate and demonstrative of a general lack of journalistic integrity. It is for these reasons that I question whether this site is something that should be appearing on Google News.
Perhaps “Leonidas” has never reported from a war zone. Perhaps Leonidas has never been trapped in a building, under curfew and under siege by a military. Perhaps Leonidas never heard of Honduras before 3 months ago. I don't know but I have been in those situations and that type of experience teaches you to treat it with respect and human dignity, regardless of which side you are on. But, from the comments I have seen, I find it hard to take him seriously and I find it very disturbing that someone searching for quality information on Google News could just as easily discover his “coverage” as I did.
In closing, I would like to address one more naive comment posted by Leonidas — that he is certain that there are human rights violations happening on both sides. No, there aren't. There are no rich, coup supporters being arrested (although they are committing horrific human rights crimes). There are no rich people being beaten. In fact, during the 24-hour curfew, the rich community on Roatan was excluded. On one side you have the Honduran ruling class with the full force of the Honduran military actively repressing a civilian population, something that has happened too many times in Latin America. Everyone reporting on this will confirm this, as will this article:
http://www.narconews.com/Issue60/article3822.html
Finally, I ask you to really consider the premise of this article — which is that the Obama Administration should recognize an illegal, illegitimate coup regime which is not recognized by any government on the face of the earth. This illegal regime is another military coup in a long line of repressive military coups which have terrorized the people of Honduras. This illegal regime is another military coup which falls into history as yet another illegal military coup which has obscenely repressed the people of Latin America. The idea that Obama should go against literally unanimous world opinion is absurd. And, I would ask you to consider that when people who have a personal stake in the matter come and post about it like I have, that your “journalists” or “commentators” do not respond with insults or quick searches for random and unrelated “evidence” to support a conclusion (rather than forming a conclusion based on the evidence). I would ask if you really believe that such disrespect for the facts and for an informed readership qualifies as true “journalism” that should appear next to organizations that do take all this seriously.
I also hope this clarifies for folks that my intention to write to Google News is not petty or emotional but rather a serious concern about the quality (or lack thereof) of information reaching people who are trying to learn about what is going on in Honduras.
“I agree with T-Steel about the pettiness of the Google comment, but on the other hand, people are human, and it's hard when you're presenting a meticulously researched, well-informed, reasoned argument, and it just seems to bounce off the other minds like a rubber ball.”
I'm sorry while I enjoy the conversation and the alternate viewpoint. There was not this barrage of facts. It was mostly rhetoric that ignored other sides and came off like old leaflets. It wasn't the first time he said he would leave and go somewhere else.
“Such bile reveals a complete and total ignorance of what terms like marxism and communism actually mean, and effectively close off all possibility of rational conversation. It's despicable, in my view.”
The funny thing is that was indeed the goal of the person who's name he is using. While I applaud the non-violent stance the Honduran National Resistance Front has take, it would of been much more honest to state his affiliation up front
“Would you suspect the integrity of someone who wore an Oliver North t-shirt, or who called himself Oliver North on a blog and used an Oliver North avatar?”
Not nessesaraly the integrity but don't you think it would say something about him, his beliefs, and goals?
He did not indicate that he had an affiliation and there is no reason to think he did. And in any event, it's irrelevant to this discussion.
But since you mention it, the goal of Jefferson Davis was to win the Civil War for the benefit of slave owners (of which I believe he was one) In other words, his goal was to defend and retain the institution of slavery. So wouldn't it be most honest of the commenter JeffersonDavis to state his affiliation with the Confederacy and support for slavery up front?
Certainly I do. But if he won fair and square in a democratically run election, I would not remove him from office and exile him in a military coup. And if I did, I would have behaved illegally and he would have the right to demand that he be returned to office.
In your eyes maybe but you are not the one who counts. The Honduran Supreme Court is.
And did the Honduran Supreme Court authorize the Honduran military to shove Zelaya into a car, drive him to the airport, put him on a plane, and eject him from his country? No, they did not. So how is it relevant that it's the Honduran Supreme Court that “counts”? The people instructed to carry out the Supreme Court's ruling did not do so as instructed.
The Supreme Court only had a hand in removing Zelaya. The impeachment was an entirely separate event and the succession went as designated in the constitution so the SC had no input on that and it's reasonable to conclude, even if you believe the SC removal would be a violation, that the entirely separate act by the congress was legal.
First of all, there was no impeachment. An impeachment by definition involves a trial and conviction. And I have said (and Pineiro has said) over and over and over and over and over again that it was not the removal from office per se that was illegal; it was the forced ejection from the country. You cannot continue with a legal process that has been violated as if the violation never happened, and call the process “democratic” or “constitutional.” I understand you either don't understand that or don't agree with it. But that is the reality.
Yes, but your implication is that if there were that “sympathy” it would discredit everything Pineiro wrote here. Why would it? Zelaya is the legitimate president of Honduras, elected in free and democratic elections. How are his or anyone else's sympathies, real or not, for Chavez or Castro relevant to the issue of Zelaya's right to hold office? I'm sorry that you don't like Chavez or Castro, but even if Zelaya does, or even if Pineiro does, so what? Zelaya still won the election. Surely you're not suggesting that the democratic will of an entire people can be subverted if one sector of society does not like the results. You're not suggesting that, are you?
Welcome back, Manuel, and thanks for giving us an insight into your personal and professional background.
As to:
“Perhaps “Leonidas” has never reported from a war zone. Perhaps Leonidas has never been trapped in a building, under curfew and under siege by a military. Perhaps Leonidas never heard of Honduras before 3 months ago. I don't know but I have been in those situations and that type of experience teaches you to treat it with respect and human dignity, regardless of which side you are on. But, from the comments I have seen, I find it hard to take him seriously and I find it very disturbing that someone searching for quality information on Google News could just as easily discover his “coverage” as I did.”
I just would like to say that some of us writing on TMV are not necessarily experts in whatever area we write about, but generally we do some due diligence research, and in defense of Leonidas (and I have no idea what his or her background is), I am sure he did, too. Most of us are “opinion writers,” and do just that, express our opinion, supported as much as possible by our own principles, background, and whatever research we do. I am sure that was the case with Leonidas, too.
Interestingly, I find that quite often I learn more from the commenters than from the original author–and I include myself in that category, even when I am the author.
It certainly has been the case with this string of comments, including, yours.
Dortian de Wind
To ManuelPineiro,
I hope you are still checking here so you will see this.
I understand and agree with everything you said on the substance of the issue here. I also agree completely on your assessment of the quality of much of the response to your comments. And finally, on a human level, I understand what you are going through emotionally, with people you love and treasured colleagues and friends in immediate danger. I really do understand that. You have every right to be upset, angry, and even distraught when the reality of what's going on is misrepresented by people who are not so personally involved.
Now…deep breath: Having said all this, I feel I must tell you that you are seriously misguided in your stated intention to contact Google News. First of all, doing that can only hurt people you don't want to hurt. There are a LOT of contributing writers here. Leonidas is not a contributing writer. He was invited to do a guest post and he did one. But complaining to Google News can only potentially harm a lot of very talented, conscientious writers here — writers who take accuracy and truth and professionalism very seriously.
Secondly — and this is a sort of almost comic point, but it's also true — if you are going to complain to Google News about misleading and inaccurate information about Honduras being promulgated at TMV, then you are necessarily going to have to complain to them about pretty much every major news organization in this country. CNN may be reporting *now* that the chemical attacks on the Brazilian embassy have been confirmed, but I assure you CNN is one of the worst offenders in terms of biased, inaccurate news coverage, on any number of issues. More generally, there really are very few major media outlets in this country that can be relied upon to provide accurate, fair, truthful coverage on either Honduras or any number of other issues of national and international interest. I promise you, Pineiro: The average reader is far more likely to pick up misinformation about Honduras from at least 100 other sources that get much more traffic than TMV does. So it's really pointless and actually kind of laughable for you or anyone to complain to Google News about Internet sources that don't report what's happening in Honduras accurately, because it's rather the ones that DO report what's happening in Honduras accurately that stand out.
I hope that you will reconsider contacting Google News, and I also hope that you will change your mind about not coming here again. Your expertise on this subject is much more useful and important than your anger at uninformed readers.
“He did not indicate that he had an affiliation and there is no reason to think he did. And in any event, it's irrelevant to this discussion.
But since you mention it, the goal of Jefferson Davis was to win the Civil War for the benefit of slave owners (of which I believe he was one) In other words, his goal was to defend and retain the institution of slavery. So wouldn't it be most honest of the commenter Jefferson Davis to state his affiliation with the Confederacy and support for slavery up front?”
Well he said that he was a member of the Honduran National Resistance front “me and the rest of the Honduran National Resistance Front” is the quote. The group is one of the main organizers of the demonstrations now occurring in Honduras. While believing that JD has some issues that you should be prepared to encounter it is hardly the same thing as being an active party in the conflict under discussion. Now if we have a Civil War thread and JD start trying to sound neutral you will have a point.
“Certainly I do. But if he won fair and square in a democratically run election, I would not remove him from office and exile him in a military coup. And if I did, I would have behaved illegally and he would have the right to demand that he be returned to office.”
Great! to bad that had nothing to do with the post you replied to.
“Yes, but your implication is that if there were that “sympathy” it would discredit everything Pineiro wrote here. Why would it? Zelaya is the legitimate president of Honduras, elected in free and democratic elections. How are his or anyone else's sympathies, real or not, for Chavez or Castro relevant to the issue of Zelaya's right to hold office? I'm sorry that you don't like Chavez or Castro, but even if Zelaya does, or even if Pineiro does, so what? Zelaya still won the election. Surely you're not suggesting that the democratic will of an entire people can be subverted if one sector of society does not like the results. You're not suggesting that, are you?”
Blah Blah Blah. I said “it would of been much more honest to state his affiliation up front” and that's what I meant. Put words in someone else's mouth
While believing that JD has some issues that you should be prepared to encounter it is hardly the same thing as being an active party in the conflict under discussion. Now if we have a Civil War thread and JD start trying to sound neutral you will have a point.
I can't compartmentalize my values that way.
Great! to bad that had nothing to do with the post you replied to.
You're right. It was a response to this from you: “Not nessesaraly the integrity but don't you think it would say something about him, his beliefs, and goals?” referring to Oliver North, and I clicked the Reply button under the wrong post. Sorry about that.
Well he said that he was a member of the Honduran National Resistance front “me and the rest of the Honduran National Resistance Front” is the quote. The group is one of the main organizers of the demonstrations now occurring in Honduras.
Yes, and Pineiro told us in his most recent comment that he has friends and loved ones directly involved in the conflict.
That said, Pineiro's political affiliations don't change what's true and factual. If his facts are correct, his facts are correct. So although you might choose to argue that his facts are not correct, his political affiliations are completely irrelevant. They just simply are not a pertinent part of any substantive argument on the issue under debate.
Manuel, while I appreciate you insight, it does not mean I need accept your views. The Republican and Democratic parties in my country are heavily involved in quite a few things too, and I feel free to question them, so with you.
Honestly what I get sounds more like a sales speech than a solid argument.
Unless there is something you can show from Hinduran law that invalidates the legal procedure follow and the study by legal expects in the report that says that by exiling Zelaya rather than putting him in jail invalidates it, I find the legal experts and the the Arcadia foundation anti-corruption group more convincing. But is it really any surprise, the people of Honduras themselve are divided on this.
Anyhow I find your perspective and your experience interesting, even if I don't find your argument convincing. Like someone said above, much of it sounds like a pamphlet to me. But maybe I'm just stupid and foolish I have no problem if you think of me that way, I just give my thoughts as I see them. I would be interested to see you describe the non political life in Honduras, I'd be interested to see how similar it is to the impression I got when I was in neighboring Nicauragua helping poor rural communites.
As a member of the opposition group it does not invalidate his claims it just indicates a likelihood a a strong bias as an involved partisan. Kinda like a republican or a democrat in a domestic issue in the states. I don't necessarily believe everything they try to tell me. Both sides have sources that support their point of view,
“I can't compartmentalize my values that way.”
Huh? That would indicate that you feel like it would be a bad thing to be a part of the Honduran National Liberation Front. Or at least that you would believe I think so. It is simply about disclosure. Manuel was speaking as more than just an advocate but as a participant and I feel honesty would of been better served by acknowledgment of that fact. Unless we are discussing something JD may be having an active role if I don't see the disclosure issue.
“Yes, and Pineiro told us in his most recent comment that he has friends and loved ones directly involved in the conflict.
“That said, Pineiro's political affiliations don't change what's true and factual. If his facts are correct, his facts are correct. So although you might choose to argue that his facts are not correct, his political affiliations are completely irrelevant. They just simply are not a pertinent part of any substantive argument on the issue under debate.”
For you I'm sure they don't. Others may feel differently. As I stated when I first asked about the name he used to post I respect a persons anonymity, but he started to use personal experiences as a basis for his statement which if you want to speak as an “expert” it does call up who you are. He didn't “reveal” his personal connection at first. That is an issue for me if he is using it as a basis for his “facts”.
For the record I have yet to see where Honduran law says that the exile of Zelaya invalidates any of the proceedings. I have heard numerous declarations but no legal cites. The reality is there is no direct law to cover the situation.
I had a whole long thing written up but forget that. http://blog.erlingsson.com/wp-content/uploads/2… is a report for the US Congress written by the law library of congress. The report states, and cites the law, that the removal of Zelaya is legal. The exile of Zelaya does not render the latter proceedings invalid. To be blunt unless I see something even close to as well written and researched as this opinion stating why the impeachment was invalid, then I will believe it was legal. Others will believe as they want, but the idea that it is absurd to believe as I do is dashed by this document.
With some people it's never really about fact no matter what they say. It's about ideology and partisanship. Hell sometime I'm going to believe what I believe no matter what the facts say (though I try to be honest with myself and really look at the truth) but I try my best to be open when proved wrong. I also try not to give knee jerk responses and have sound bases for my beliefs.
When people ignore facts. Target parts of arguments instead of the whole. Shift arguments as their “facts” are shot down. It just gets old. If you are going to ignore facts for your opinion the fine state your opinion and leave it at that. Why pretend to have a discussion when that's the last thing you are open to?
Manuel P. talked as if the marxists were the only ones facing slaughter and acts of terror in Honduran history. I don't sympathize with him when he states it like that.
Do I disagree with all the world's leaders and organizations? No, but from time to time they can be wrong.
I stand against world-government and believe all nations (including Honduras) should determine their own fate. Marxism is in full heated swing in Central America. (and Kathy…. I'm sure I understand what Marxism means, thank you). The marxists I fought in Central America were vile,violent, and terroristic. The Honduran constitution should be adhered to. But it shouldn't be manipulated the way that Manuel P. is attempting to do. If they elect a marxist, then so be it. If not, leave it alone.
Do I think I'm smarter than the rest of you on this issue? Not at all. I higher respect the vast majority ot all that post here. I enjoy the debate. And believe it or not, I agree with you more than you may believe.
Kathy…. Yes Zelaya was democratically elected.
He was also democratically removed.
That can happen in the US too. It's called impeachment.
For those of you who believe that anything “democratic” is happening in Honduras, I would ask you to read the Executive Order that has just been printed in all of this morning's newspapers, at the request of the illegal coup regime. Things are about to get very difficult in Honduras:
Decree:
Article 1. For a period of 45 days beginning with this decree’s publication, the Constitutional rights of Articles 69, 72, 81 and 84, are suspended.
Article 2. The Armed Forces will support, together or separately with the National Police, when the situation requires, to execute the necessary plans to maintain the order and security of the Republic.
Article 3. The following is prohibited:
First: Freedom of transit, which will be restricted according to the parameters established by press releases broadcast on all radio and TV stations by the President of the Republic, which will be in effect in all national territory and during curfews, with the exception of cargo transport, ambulances, and urban traffic in the cities excluded in said communiqués, and medical personell and nurses that in those cities work during curfew hours.
Second: All public meetings not authorized by police or military authorities.
Third: Publication in any media, spoken, written or televised, of information that offends human dignity, public officials, or criticizes the law and the government resolutions, or any style of attack against the public order and peace. CONATEL (the Honduran communications commission), through the National Police and the Armed Forces, is authorized to suspend any radio station, television channel or cable system that does not adjust its programming to the present decree.
Article 4. It is ordered:
First: Detain all persons who are found outside of the established orders of circulation, or that in any manner are suspected by police and military authorities of damaging people or property, those that associate with the goal of committing criminal acts or that place their own lives in danger. All detainees will be read their rights, and at the same time must be brought to be booked in a police station of the country, identifying all persons detained, their motives, the hour of arrest and release from the police station, recording the physical condition of the detainee, to avoid future accusations of supposed crimes of torture.
Second: All persons detained must remain confined in the legally established detention centers.
Third: All public offices, national, state and municipal, that have been occupied by demonstrators or have persons inside of them engaging in illegal activities will be cleared.
Fourth: All Secretaries of State, decentralized institutions, municipalities and other state organisms must place themselves at the orders of the National Police and Armed Forces without any equivocation, along with all means at their disposal, for the development of these operations.
Article 5. The present Decree becomes law immediately, being duly published in the Official Daily “La Gaceta” and will be sent to the National Congress to be made law.
Ordered from the Presidential Palace in the City of Tegucigalpa, municipality of the Central District, on the 22nd of September of 2009.
ROBERTO MICHELETTI BAIN
———————————-
These are the rights that have been suspended:
Article 69: Personal liberty is inviolable and only through law can it be restricted or suspended temporarily.
Article 72: The expression of thought by any media, without censorship, is free. Those who interfere with this right or through direct or indirect means restrict or impede the communication and circulation of ideas and opinions will held responsible by the law.
Article 81: Every person has the right to circulate freely, leave, enter and remain in national territory.
No one can be obligated to move from his home or residence except in special cases in accord with the law.
Article 84: No one can be arrested or detained except through written order by competent authorities, executed through legal formalities and for motives established by law.
Notwithstanding, open delinquency can be apprehended by any person only to deliver the delinquent to the authorities.
The arrested or detained person must be informed clearly of his rights and the facts of the accusations against him, and, additionally, authorities must permit him to communicate his detention to a family member or person of his choice.
—————————————————————————————–
Again I will reiterate that “JeffersonDavis” and “Leonidas” have opinions that are at odds with the opinions of every single government on earth. Their insistence that they are right while the entire world is wrong, while military decrees like the one above are imposed on the Honduran people, is a disgrace. These people can have a form but it is not a legitimate news source.
HONDURAS MARTIAL LAW UPDATE #1 – ILLEGAL COUP REGIME SENDS ARMY TO SHUT DOWN OPPOSITION MEDIA EARLY ON MONDAY MORNING
TEGUCIGALPA (Reuters) – Honduras' de facto government on Monday sent troops to shut down two local media stations loyal to ousted President Manuel Zelaya as it dug in to resist international pressure to return him to power.
Zelaya was overthrown in a military coup on June 28, but he secretly returned from exile and sought refuge in the Brazilian embassy last Monday, sparking a tense standoff with the de facto civilian government that has promised to arrest him.
Hundreds of soldiers and riot police have surrounded the embassy for the past week, while Zelaya urges his followers to take to the streets to demand he be restored to power in the coffee- and textile-producing country.
Representatives of the Organisation of American States will hold an extraordinary session on Monday to discuss the Honduran face-off. Honduras denied entry on Sunday to an OAS delegation seeking to broker a solution to the crisis.
The raids on Radio Globo and Cholusat Sur television — both critical of the de facto government — came early on Monday, said Radio Globo director David Romero, and followed a decree allowing suspension of some civil rights and media.
Both stations have been taken off air several times since the coup.
“Troops assaulted the radio, took over the station and took it off the air,” Romero said
It would be useful to have the original author of the post comment on these latest comments by Manuel.
Are they factual?
Does he disdagree with them? If so, why?
etc., etc.:Are they
It would be useful to have the original author of the post comment on these latest comments by Manuel.
Are they factual?
Does he disagree with them? If so, why?
(Reposted because of errors)
“You have to admit that it's a little funny that “JeffersonDavis” is making broad assumptions about the political leanings of someone based upon hir avatar.”
Good point. I stand corrected and apologize for the generalization. But in my defense…. Go look at some of my other posts on this topic, and you'll see where the passion came from.
I still think that a marxist like Manuel P. does not deserve our sympathy. I stand by that remark.
But the main issue remains. It would be nice to see the US stay out of Honduran (and Central American) affairs. I guess if Chavez stopped funding his leftist insurgents, we could stop funding the democratic ones.
Any recent decrees have nothing to do with the Constitutionality of the removal of Zelaya. Some of them are a bit drastic, but when you have looting and civil disruption there is a need to restore law and order. I've seen the pictures of looting in Honduras by the mobs, and its the responsibility of the government to keep this from endangering the citizenry.
That being said, some of the censorship and propaganda by the government overreaches in my opinion. I think the best remark I saw on the situation came from a radio station manager who is pro Zelaya said, something like: no one tells 100% of the truth in Hoduras. Both sides have their talking points and spin. Honduras would have been better off if Zelaya had been simply thrown in jail or remained abroad and the people allowed to democratically elect their leaders in monitored elections. I think this must be what Zelaya and his supporters fear, and why they are trying to prevent elections that they can't control. I can support mob rule over the rule of law.
Anyhow for the issue of the removal,the most credible thing I've seen is the statements of the legal experts that Zelaya was legally removed from power. Until I see something more compelling, I'll stick with that view, no matter what happens as a consequence of Zelaya trying to topple the government of Honduras.
Zelaya's return to Honduras 'irresponsible': US official
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/AL…
Lewis Amselem is serving as Acting U.S. Permanent Representative to the Organization of American States.
“That being said, some of the censorship and propaganda by the government overreaches in my opinion, especially this latest bit which I do not condone. The governments actions hurt their chances of resuming normal relations with other countries and it was a big mistake.”
It is a concern (censorship) but the fact is the press has major issues in Honduras and that part gets left out. Almost all the press is partisan to an extreme. Radio Globo, a station shut down, was owned by a political ally of Zelaya and hasn't been reporting for some time. They are advocating and inciting. TeleSur is widely considered a propaganda tool for leftest nations in Central and South America. (It is interesting to note that most of the clips we see are teleSur even on CNN. It seems other stations crews often get attacked and driven off while TeleSure are allowed to film unmolested.) One paper Diario El Tiempo is owned by Jaime Rosenthal. Yani his son is reportedly the one who smuggled Zelaya back in to Honduras.
Lets face it, it is a mess.
“Leonidas”: I have already provided you with legal analysis that shows that the military coup in Honduras was illegal and that President Zelaya did not violate the law:
1) Zelaya's actions as president were legal – http://www.counterpunch.org/thorensen07012009.html
2) Honduran army attorney confirms that overthrow of Zelaya was illegal – http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/story/…
3) Numerous constitutional violations during the illegal coup d'etat in Honduras make it illegal and illegitimate – http://www.latribuna.hn/web2.0/?p=25375
4) Nineteen members of Honduran Congress declare June 28 actions to be unconstitutional, making these actions an illegal coup d'etat – http://www.tiempo.hn/secciones/crisis-politica-…
5) An English explanation (including translation) of #4 – http://www.tiempo.hn/secciones/crisis-politica-…
6) Honduran Constitutional Lawyer & Professor of explains why the June 28 actions were unconstitutional and constituted a coup d'etat – http://www.latribuna.hn/web2.0/?p=19617
7) Francisco Palacios Romeo, Professor of Constitutional Law at the Universidad de Zaragoza, explains why President Zelaya committed no crime (which would have come to light had the military not executed a coup d'etat) – http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=87999
9) Interview with constitutional law expert Palacios, in which he explains that the Supreme Court decision was merely political theater to provide a backdrop for the coup d'etat – http://www.telesurtv.net/noticias/opinion/1101/…
10) Legal analysis errors in the US Library of Congress Report on Honduran Coup – http://www.upsidedownworld.org/main/content/vie…
11) A Judicial Analysis – Why the June 28 Actions Were an Illegal Coup d'Etat – http://voselsoberano.com/v1/index.php?option=co…
12) A continuation of the “Judicial Analysis” Series, further details on the illegal and unconstitutional actions that all add up to a military coup d'etat – http://honduras.redeshn.com/2009/08/08/el-golpe…
As you can see, most of these articles are written by Honduran Law Professors, also the famous constitutional law expert from Spain (Francisco Palacios Romeo) or actual members of the Honduran government — including at least one who was politically opposed to Zelaya before the coup but have since spoken out against the coup.
Leonidas, your insistence that you want to see “credible statements of the legal experts” — here you go. This just scratches the surface. Since the coup d'etat, countless analyses have been written to explain, from a legal and constitutional point of view, why the June 28th actions were nothing more than the traditional actions of coup supporters to justify an illegal military coup d'etat. The difference this time is that we have the internet and unlike the numerous coup d'etats in Latin America in the 20th century, these analyses are not available only to those who subscribe to law journals or so on. They are readily available all over the internet.
Since you have hinged your argument on the legal justification for the coup d'etat in Honduras, I would like to see your responses to these analyses. For this dozen, there are a dozen more because the coup is widely unpopular in Honduras and numerous constitutional law experts have picked apart the shallow justification used for the coup.
While you're at it, perhaps you can also explain to me what shutting down Radio Globo and Channel 36 has to do with preventing looters. Perhaps you can explain to me how shutting down “all public meetings not authorized by police or military authorities” has anything to do with looting.
I'm also curious to find out how you think the so-called November elections are going to take place when most of the time that people have to do campaigning for those elections is going to occur under strict martial law. Don't elections involve political rallies? Don't they involve political meetings? Don't they include criticisms of the incumbent “government”? Since all of this is illegal now, have you started to understand why the world will not recognize these elections?
BTW, European diplomats are headed back to Honduras but they still refuse to recognize the illegal coup regime:”European Union countries have decided to send back their envoys to Honduras to help resolve the crisis following the ousting of the country's president, the Swedish EU presidency said Saturday. But it added that the move in no way implied recognition of the country's de facto government.” – http://www.france24.com/en/20090926-eu-countrie…
Also, you may have noticed that the Executive Decree that has suspended even more constitutional rights and deepened the martial law that is necessary to avoid the people overthrowing the military dictatorship was issued by the office of Roberto Micheletti, and at the end it says: “The present Decree becomes law immediately, being duly published in the Official Daily 'La Gaceta' and will be sent to the National Congress to be made law.”
This just goes to show that the illusion that a “democracy” is in power in Honduras is a joke. The president and his military buddies decide to shred the constitution and THEN send it to Congress to become a law. What if it was voted down? What if Congress doesn't agree? The fact is that anyone who doesn't agree has either been arrested or driven underground through intimidation. This is the so-called “democracy” that you support?
I eagerly await your refutation of the extensive legal analysis that explains why this was an illegal military coup, and nothing resembling a democratic process.
Still, Honduras would have been better off if Zelaya had been simply thrown in jail or remained abroad and the people allowed to democratically elect their leaders in monitored elections.
I don't get your determination on this issue, but here's some more perspective from Honduran business people. Honduras would have been better off if Zelaya had simply served out the remaining FIVE MONTHS until the election in which HE WAS NOT A CANDIDATE. Instead, my friend who has a coffee company in the capital has had his American and European investors back out, my friend in the tourism industry is, well, customerless, and my friend in real estate development has also had his investors get cold feet.
Leonidas, you are in my opinion simply on the wrong side of this. You keep saying we should keep out of Honduran affairs. That's what Obama is doing. He certainly isn't pulling a Reagan and sending in armed “freedom fighter” thugs. Finally, I still think your position that you know better than all the worlds' leaders and organizations, is just insufferably arrogant, as is JD saying “they (all world leaders and oganizations) can be wrong.”
Manuel, that is disturbing news about the new martial law decree. One of our news commentators (maybe Rachel Maddow?) paraphrased an old line from poet James Whitcomb Riley. She said “if it walks like a coup, and talks like a coup, and acts like a coup, it's probably a coup.”
Also, thank you for all the links and determination to help those of us with open minds to understand what's going on there. If you Google this site and Honduras, you'll quickly find that I have posted some of the same links. You'll also find that we have a small contingent of far right commenters here, an even smaller cadre of far right “guest” posters (Michael Reagan – gag. Floyd and Mary Ultragag). This is Leon's first post, though I've sparred with him/her on many issues. Bottom line, this site is a tossed salad of people with VERY divergent viewpoints. Please don't judge us by our extremes.
JD,
No matter how many times you repeat a falsehood, it's still a falsehood. Honduras's constitution does not permit the president to be forcibly exiled from his country without a legal process. And no, a legal warrant for his arrest that was violated by flying him out of the country instead of arresting him is not a legal process. Zelaya was not democratically removed.
Impeachment, as well, is a legal process that must be done as legally prescribed. No democratic constitution or democratic system in the world allows a country's leader to be impeached in absentia with no trial or conviction and without the opportunity to confront his accusers and call witnesses in his behalf. This is not surprising, since Pineiro has told you repeatedly that the current Constitution in Honduras was written during a previous, illegitimate military dictatorship.
When you can find a U.S. history book that has something in it about a president who was arrested in the dead of night, forced into a car in his pajamas, flown out of the country, and then “impeached” in absentia, then please, by all means, come back and tell me that that is impeachment and that it can happen in the U.S., too.
I still think that a marxist like Manuel P. does not deserve our sympathy.
Leaving aside the definition of marxism, your statement is utterly anti-democratic.
This is not a matter of “sympathy.” This is a matter of legal due process and of democracy. If you accept that the results of the election that put Zelaya into the presidency were legitimate (i.e., the election was free and fair, not fixed, not fraudulent) then you have to accept those results. Your agreement or disagreement, sympathy or lack of sympathy with the particular person who won the election is irrelevant. This was precisely why conservatives argued (and actually many liberals did, too) that the results of the 2000 presidential election in the U.S. ultimately had to be accepted, despite any doubts about fraud: because, simply put, to continue to challenge the legitimacy of GWB's presidency would be to question our democratic process. So if you agree that the election that put Zelaya in office was democratic, then you cannot logically or legitimately claim that removing him from office and exiling him with no due process was appropriate, simply because you don't have sympathy for his political philosophy.
Some of them are a bit drastic, but when you have looting and civil disruption there is a need to restore law and order.
This is the line used by every dictatorship in human history to justify brutality toward dissidents. Pinochet used it in Chile, Argentina's government used it during what they called “the dirty little war,” the former Soviet Union used it. Jeane Kirkpatrick used the same argument you are using to justify the U.S. turning a blind eye to the gang rape and murder of three Jesuit nuns by the right-wing paramilitaries we were funding in El Salvador during the Reagan administration.
It has no more legitimacy when you say it than when any of those others did.
Hotheads in Honduras brought economic and social distress to their nation rather than wait five months for the November election. Shame on them. Much as I might have liked Bush and Cheney dragged out of bed and “expatriated,” that is NOT how it's done here. Nor is that how it's supposed to be done in Honduras. In a democracy, we wait for elections.
This, too, is the classic excuse given by tyrants and dictatorships the world over for persecuting and/or censoring the press. “They are advocating and inciting.”
I can't thank you enough for this treasure trove of links to factual information. Thank you for not giving up on us.
Simply not true, he picked sides and cut aid.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/06/29/polit…
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/09/03/world…
He stuck an interventionalist foot into the nation.
He cut aid. Yes, and we should give aid only to those who follow the rule of law, or at the least, use our aid to nudge repressive regimes toward democracy. You don't aid coups.
And yes, like other world leaders, who have better access to information than EVEN you, we condemned the coup.
IF the coup leaders exit the stage, and IF there are free and fair elections there, then Honduras returns to being a democracy, returns to the rule of law, and aid can continue.
Well the Honduran judiciary and the CRS report don't agree with you. I still find those to be the most credible.
Like I said we should not have cut aid. Its very obvious that the Honduran government took pains to follow the proper procedures (exception of exiling Zelaya instead of throwing him in chains).
Well world leaders certainly had better access to information, no dispute there. So does that mean we were right to trust. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld because they had better access to information? I don't think so. The CRS likely had some pretty darned good access to information and had legal experts that said it was a legal removal.
Too bad they didn't lock him up, then they wouldn't have given a talking point to those who want to claim this as some sort of rational reason that the government is illegal. Pretty darn silly in my opinion, like exiling him instead of locking him up makes a bit of difference as to the legality as established by the top judicial authority in Honduras and supported by the CRS report findings.
But its just my opinion and that wont change anything much one way or the other. Your welcome to come to a different conclusion and while I disagree i don't hold that against you.
Manuel,
I am not a spanish reader, so any of those Spanish links you have in English for your points would be appreciated. I doubt i will agree with them, but I wouldn't mind viewing them. I cant really respond one way or the other about them unless I see a translation.
This is no fault of your own, just my ignorance of the spanish language beyond a few very simple basics.
I do find one thing quite interesting Maneul, your shift on position regarding the CRS report. In your first post of this thred you accuse me of not reading it correctly and that:
Yet now you post a link above that denounces “errors” in the findings and questions the legitmacy of it. So it would appear to me that your position has shifted and you are now trying to denouce a report that you had previously tried to reference as a credible support for your position.
In other news on Honduras looks like the government is easing the restrictions, thats a good thing, I think all will agree.
http://www.star-telegram.com/breaking_news/stor…