Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
The Long Arm of the Mossad
As the buffoonish Chavez acolyte Manuel Zelaya camps out in the Brazilian embassy, the Wall Street Journal reports that "roving bands of his supporters [have] set up roadblocks around the capital, smashed windows, and engaged in sporadic battles with police and army troops." As the Wall Street Journal Europe observed, the rigged elections in Iran and the subsequent murder of pro-democracy protesters produced little reaction in the European Union—it was "too early" for such a decision, according to Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt—but Brussels swiftly applied economic sanctions on the new government in Honduras, while recently lifting diplomatic sanctions against the Cuban dictatorship. And now Zelaya, taking a page from fellow nutter Kwame Ture's playbook, is accusing the Israelis (!) of poisoning him with radiation. The Miami Herald reports:
"We are being threatened with death,'' he said in an interview with The Miami Herald, adding that mercenaries were likely to storm the embassy where he has been holed up since Monday and assassinate him....
Zelaya was deposed at gunpoint on June 28 and slipped back into his country on Monday, just two days before he was scheduled to speak before the United Nations. He sought refuge at the Brazilian Embassy, where Zelaya said he is being subjected to toxic gases and radiation that alter his physical and mental state.
The Obama administration too has turned the screws on the de facto government in Tegucigalpa, which forced Zelaya out of the country after his administration ignored a supreme court decision halting a plebiscite on extending term limits:
The U.S. State Department sought to tighten the pressure on the Micheletti government last week by canceling $30 million in non-humanitarian aid, revoking the visas of political leaders who supported Zelaya's ouster and seeming to close the door on recognizing the result of the Nov. 29 presidential and congressional elections.
The U.S. is the 800-pound gorilla in Honduras; more than half of Honduras' trade is with the U.S. The U.S. also has a military base in Honduras, the brightest Hondurans study in the U.S. and Hondurans speak English as a point of pride.
jtuf|9.24.09 @ 3:19PM|#
Demonstrators affiliated with No Mas Chavez are across the street from the UN headquarters today. Some of their signs called for Obama to butt out of Honduran politics.
Oz|9.24.09 @ 3:20PM|#
I'm just embarrassed as an American is all I can say. It's truly disheartening.
jtuf|9.24.09 @ 3:21PM|#
Perhaps we should plan a money bomb to help Hunduras. Does any one know a good charity to donate to and a symbolic date?
PR|9.24.09 @ 3:28PM|#
if mossad can drop a burning iranian awacs on top of khomeini's cadaver, is there anything they can't do?
|9.24.09 @ 3:29PM|#
Good lord. They've preemptively declared the next round of
elections as illegitimate? Why?
Oh, I know, the entire Honduran exercise is an excuse for the
lefties in the administration to demonstrate their fides to Castro,
Chavez, and their ilk. They're all flashing back to their days of
cheering the Sandanistas and chanting "no pasaran" outside the
chancellor's house.
I mean, hard-left kleptocracies in America are so crucial to our
national security.
The whole thing makes me want to puke.
Abdul|9.24.09 @ 3:32PM|#
Honduras is one of the few reliable US allies in Latin
America.
I guess they fucked up by trusting us.
2yellowdogs|9.24.09 @ 3:50PM|#
You can always count on the Obama administration...they never miss a chance to support another leftist or Chavez wanna-be somewhere in the world.
JB|9.24.09 @ 3:50PM|#
Not only does Obama put actual crazies in his administration, he
supports them when they try to become dictators of countries.
Sick.
Geotpf|9.24.09 @ 3:53PM|#
Wasn't this guy the legitimately elected president of the country and overthrown in a coup? Just checking.
|9.24.09 @ 3:54PM|#
The U.S. is the 800-pound gorilla in Honduras
RACIST!
And weightist, for that matter!
|9.24.09 @ 3:56PM|#
Wasn't this guy the legitimately elected president of the
country and overthrown in a coup? Just checking.
He was not "overthrown in a coup", he was legitimately removed from
office by impeachment and conviction in accordance with the
Honduran constitution.
Thanks for checking, to the extent you were sincere about that.
|9.24.09 @ 3:58PM|#
JB, what do you want to bet that, if the pressure being applied to Honduras is successful, Van Jones gets hired by Zelaya's govt as a 'thank you' for Obama's support.
Rich|9.24.09 @ 4:03PM|#
"Israeli mercenaries'' are torturing him with high-frequency
radiation.
Here, too, we get "tortured with high-frequency radiation" -- but
it's the network news.
Geotpf|9.24.09 @ 4:04PM|#
Tulpa-Not according to the Miami Herald linked above. It refers
to him being ousted in a coup several times.
Has any other government of any nation, or the United Nations,
recoginized the current government as legitimate? Thought
not.
Just because he's a leftist doesn't make ousting him in a coup a
thing one should support.
|9.24.09 @ 4:08PM|#
Geotpf, it does say "coup" twice, in sentences that are giving
Zelaya's side of the story. It also has this paragraph:
Micheletti took Zelaya's place after the military, executing a Supreme Court arrest warrant, burst into Zelaya's house and forced him into exile. The country's military, congress, Supreme Court and economic leaders have backed the ouster, arguing that Zelaya was bent on conducting an illegal plebiscite that they feared would ultimately lead to his reelection.
|9.24.09 @ 4:08PM|#
Geotpf, if you've only been following the mainstream media, you'd think that. But Zelaya was trying to have an unconstitutional referendum that would have allowed him to stay in office beyond the legal term limit. The Supreme Court and the Army said no and tossed him out, all legally. Afterwards they found computers with election "results" that showed Zelaya winning. He's just another Chavez wannabe whose illegal power-grab was thwarted.
|9.24.09 @ 4:11PM|#
Just because he's a leftist doesn't make ousting him in a coup a thing one should support.
That the Supreme Court and Legislature should both disagree with
the Executive is a constitutional crisis. Would you care to give a
reason why you'd support the Executive over the other two branches?
The history of Latin America makes it clear that overreaching by
Executives (US allies, US enemies, and those in between) has been
one of its worst recurring problems.
No, I don't support him. Just as just because Uribe has been good
for Colombia and a US ally doesn't meant that I think his
attempt to repeal term limits and seek a third term is a good idea,
either.
Uribe's attempt, though, doesn't seem to be explicitly barred by
the Colombian constitution, and is (foolishly) being supported by
the Legislature.
Geotpf|9.24.09 @ 4:12PM|#
Nowhere in that does it say he was impeached, which is the
current theory tossed around. There was no legal impeachment
proceeding. He was simply removed from office at gunpoint.
He was elected president. He tried to hold a possible illegal
refreredum making it possible for him to be re-elected to an
additional term. Instead of simply refusing to carry out that
election, the army overthrew him in a coup.
Barack Obama|9.24.09 @ 4:13PM|#
"He's just another Chavez wannabe whose illegal power-grab was
thwarted."
So you can't help but love the guy.
|9.24.09 @ 4:13PM|#
The big trend in Latin America has been Executives pushing to
remove term limits, whether left or right. Chavez, Morales, Correa,
Uribe, Ortega. It's the lust for power and viewing oneself as
indispensible.
It seems like one thing that Lula has some sense on.
|9.24.09 @ 4:14PM|#
Geotpf, the impeachment of Bill Clinton was--and still is--referred to as a "right-wing coup attempt" in many areas of the mainstream media. If you're going to outsource your thinking, I'd recommend giving it to Indian journalists rather than Americans. They'll do it for half as much and don't take coffee breaks.
Geotpf|9.24.09 @ 4:15PM|#
That is, the solution was to prevent the referendum from
happening, or invalidating it in court, not removing this guy from
office.
He seems to be popular, and was elected in a free and fair
election. Needless to say, removing him in this fashion basically
guarantees an unstable government or civil war.
|9.24.09 @ 4:16PM|#
Instead of simply refusing to carry out that election, the army overthrew him in a coup.
The army "execut[ed] a Supreme Court arrest
warrant," according to the article. And the Honduran
Congress had previously voted that plebiscite illegal. And Zelaya
said that his own people were going to run the election if the army
refused. Please address that issue, Geotpf.
What do you do when the President refuses to abide by laws pass by
Congress and the orders of the Supreme Court? It provokes
a constitutional crisis.
|9.24.09 @ 4:17PM|#
Geotpf -
Actually, a secret order was issued by the Supreme Court to the
military to remove him from office, and then a special session of
the National Assembly was convened to appoint a new
President.
Hardly a bunch of footloose commandos carrying out the orders of a
cabal of evil right wing Generals....
|9.24.09 @ 4:17PM|#
That is, the solution was to prevent the referendum from happening, or invalidating it in court, not removing this guy from office.
The Honduran Congress voted that it was illegal, the Supreme Court
invalidated it, the army refused to run it, and Zelaya said he
would do it anyway.
In addition, if you read the Honduran Constitution, it says that
any President that makes an attempt to remove term limits
is immediately ineligible for office.
Geotpf|9.24.09 @ 4:18PM|#
If there was some sort of court proceeding prior to the
impeachment, that would be one thing. Nobody stuck a gun in Bill
Clinton's face and dragged him out of the White House. He was
impeached in a formal hearing, and happened to win.
In any case, name a single foreign government or official agency
(United Nations, etc.) who thinks the manner in which Zelaya was
removed was legitimate.
Zeb|9.24.09 @ 4:18PM|#
No, it was not a coup. The Honduran constitution required him to be removed from office (I don't know if impeachment is the right term or not). A coup is an extra-constitutional removal of an executive. This was all done according to the law.
|9.24.09 @ 4:19PM|#
The solution was to remove him from office because the Honduran
Constitution mandates removing him from office.
He disobeyed an order of the Supreme Court and the vote of
Congress. What can be done in such a situation. "Needless to say,"
when the President openly and flagrantly does so in this fashion,
it "basically guarantees an unstable government or civil war."
|9.24.09 @ 4:20PM|#
The big trend in Latin America has been Executives pushing
to remove term limits, whether left or right. Chavez, Morales,
Correa, Uribe, Ortega. It's the lust for power and viewing oneself
as indispensible.
Luckily we've never had any US
President like that.
|9.24.09 @ 4:20PM|#
The Honduran constitution has some super-sensitive provisions to forestall a strong man taking power. That's why the administration's position makes no sense.
|9.24.09 @ 4:21PM|#
Geotpf, if you've only been following the mainstream media,
you'd think that. But Zelaya was trying to have an unconstitutional
referendum that would have allowed him to stay in office beyond the
legal term limit.
The same way Bloomberg did in NYC?
|9.24.09 @ 4:22PM|#
In any case, name a single foreign government or official
agency (United Nations, etc.) who thinks the manner in which Zelaya
was removed was legitimate.
Governments and "official" NGOs aren't a good target for
outsourcing your thinking either. Cheap is the name of the game
man, seriously.
|9.24.09 @ 4:22PM|#
If there was some sort of court proceeding prior to the impeachment, that would be one thing. Nobody stuck a gun in Bill Clinton's face and dragged him out of the White House. He was impeached in a formal hearing, and happened to win.
President Clinton agreed to follow the Supreme Court's rulings and
to attend the impeachment proceedings. If Clinton had just refused
to participate and not acknowledged the proceedings at all, what
then? Do you say, "Oh, the President won't play along with Congress
and the Supreme Court, I guess there's no way to remove him from
office?"
If the President doesn't submit to the trial, there's no way to
remove him. Nixon should have thought of that. He'd still be in
office today if we played by Geotpf's rules.
|9.24.09 @ 4:24PM|#
Luckily we've never had any US President like that.
Well, we were better off, because, among other things:
1) He was only violating an informal (but wise) tradition;
2) Support quickly built to make it a formal rule;
3) His own party refused to go along with the Court-packing plan
too.
But yes, it's a natural temptation of power.
EJM|9.24.09 @ 4:24PM|#
The big trend in Latin America has been Executives pushing
to remove term limits, whether left or right. Chavez, Morales,
Correa, Uribe, Ortega. It's the lust for power and viewing oneself
as indispensible.
It's also arguably
a trend in Africa. (See, in particular, the "Africa's
Third-Term Winners and Losers" infobox on
the second page.)
hammeredHead|9.24.09 @ 4:39PM|#
This has really turned out to be way to much trouble for Honduras. Why did they not just shoot him or drop him off in Costa Rica without landing the plane?
|9.24.09 @ 4:39PM|#
One wonders, would the concept of executive term limits have
ever seen the light of day had George Washington kept running for
president until he died? The answer is by no means clear.
Furthermore, if he'd done as he wanted and not run for reelection,
would one term rather than two have been the norm?
Joe M|9.24.09 @ 4:45PM|#
Luckily we've never had any US President like
that.
Anyone ever wonder how different U.S. history would be if Calvin
Coolidge had decided to run again in 1928? How would he have
handled the crash of 1929? Better than Hoover did, I suspect. What
a shame.
Random Dude|9.24.09 @ 4:52PM|#
"Nowhere in that does it say he was impeached, which is the
current theory tossed around. There was no legal impeachment
proceeding. He was simply removed from office at gunpoint."
Geotpf:
You are wrong about this. The vote to remove him in Congress was
unanimous, however they have don't have the formality of
impeachment procedures in their Constitution as we do. The Supreme
Court also unanimously ruled that he was in violation of
the Honduran Constitution, which makes it treason
to even attempt to change the term limit laws. Because the country
has no vice-president, a member of his own political party, a
civilian, was appointed to the presidency. The Supreme Court is
given the authority to use the military in the Honduran
Constitution.
However, if you don't believe me, perhaps the
Congressional Research Service could change your
mind:
Geotpf|9.24.09 @ 4:52PM|#
Lemme copy a bit from the Wikipedia article on this:
No foreign governments have recognized the new government and
many of them have described the events as a coup d'état.[14] The
United Nations, the Organization of American States,[15] the United
States, and the European Union condemned the removal of Zelaya as a
military coup. The OAS suspended Honduras on Saturday, 4 July,
after the caretaker government refused to reinstate President
Zelaya.[16][17] In response, the military's chief lawyer, Colonel
Herberth Bayardo Inestroza, stated, "In the moment that we
took him out of the country, in the way that he was taken out,
there was a crime. Because of the circumstances of the
moment this crime occurred, there is going to be a justification
and cause for acquittal that will protect us." Deputy
Attorney General Roy David Urtecho has begun an investigation into
why Zelaya was removed from Honduras by force instead of being
charged in court.[18]
My argument is that he should have been charged in court instead of
being removed by force. The fact that he was removed by force makes
it a coup, period.
|9.24.09 @ 4:54PM|#
Another odd thing is that the Honduran Constitution actually
does not have a separate process for impeachment,
according to
the analysis of the Law Library of Congress. It used to mention
impeachment, but gave no process. However, it also granted
politicians immunity. A Decree in 2003 repealed both provisions; no
politician has general immunity, but there is no special
impeachment process. Violations of Honduran law by the President
are dealt with through the normal court system alone.
The Law Library of Congress concludes that the removal appears to
follow Honduran law, but that exiling him from the country appears
to be illegal. He should have been held for the trial that the
Supreme Court ordered.
|9.24.09 @ 4:54PM|#
@ Geotpf
Here is a good WSJ
article from June on the topic.
If you don't subscribe, e-mail me and I'll send you the text.
-JGB
|9.24.09 @ 4:55PM|#
This has really turned out to be way to much trouble for
Honduras. Why did they not just shoot him
Yep. If you strike at the (would-be) king . . . .
Thanks for playing, Geotpf. You provided a sterling example of
getting pwned on a comment board.
|9.24.09 @ 4:55PM|#
"In the moment that we took him out of the country, in the way that he was taken out, there was a crime"
Yes, "in the moment that [they] took him out of the
country" it was a crime. Exiling him was illegal.
My argument is that he should have been charged in court instead of being removed by force. The fact that he was removed by force makes it a coup, period.
He should have been charged in court. But he should have been
arrested. The two things are separate. The fact that he was removed
by force was in accordance with law. The fact that he was sent out
of the country was not.
Mango Punch|9.24.09 @ 4:56PM|#
From the above mentioned WSJ article:
"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
Calculating that some critical mass of Hondurans would take his
side, the president decided he would run the referendum himself. So
on Thursday he led a mob that broke into the military installation
where the ballots from Venezuela were being stored and then had his
supporters distribute them in defiance of the Supreme Court's
order.
The attorney general had already made clear that the referendum was
illegal, and he further announced that he would prosecute anyone
involved in carrying it out. Yesterday, Mr. Zelaya was arrested by
the military and is now in exile in Costa Rica."
I'm no expert on Honduran law, but that seems pretty explicit and
reasonable.
|9.24.09 @ 4:56PM|#
Deputy Attorney General Roy David Urtecho has begun an investigation into why Zelaya was removed from Honduras by force instead of being charged in court.
Yes. He should not have been removed from the country itself. He
should have been removed from office and charged in court.
|9.24.09 @ 4:57PM|#
My argument is that he should have been charged in court
instead of being removed by force. The fact that he was removed by
force makes it a coup, period.
Not really. He was immediately ineligible to hold office upon
trying to push through the referendum. He refused to vacate the
office, meaning that the only way to implement the Constitution was
to remove him by force.
The exile was probably extralegal; no doubt the Hondurans thought
that he would cause less domestic trouble if he was exiled rather
than held pending trial.
Really, its a shame he wasn't shot attempting to escape from
custody.
Nipplemancer|9.24.09 @ 4:58PM|#
hypothetical for Geoptf - if zelaya were to refuse to step down after his legal term ended, would you consider his forcible removal as a coup? or would you wait for the OAS, UN, and other organizations to tell you what took place?
|9.24.09 @ 4:59PM|#
Geotpf, did you even read what you bolded? It completely agrees
with the CRS report by the Law Library of Congress. Removal from
office and arrest was legitimate-- your point about impeachment
doesn't carry weight because there is no separate impeachment
process. He did, however, become ineligible to be President.
Being sent out of the country was a mistake and illegal. He should
have been made to stand trial. I believe that they felt,
mistakenly, like exile would lead to more peace and be an easy way
out. It was not.
Geotpf|9.24.09 @ 5:10PM|#
One could also make the argument that the Honduran constitution
is fundamentally flawed in the fact impeachment is allowed but no
process is described to carry it out. The current situation is the
result of this flaw.
Any removal of a major elected official is going to be
controversial to the point of starting a civil war if not done in
an orderly manner according to previously agreed upon procedures.
That will probably be the net result here.
Random Dude|9.24.09 @ 5:24PM|#
Geotpf said:
"One could also make the argument that the Honduran constitution is
fundamentally flawed in the fact impeachment is allowed but no
process is described to carry it out. The current situation is the
result of this flaw."
You don't get off so easy :-). Until you affirm that this wasn't a
"coup," I think you're just doing some mental justification for the
premature reactions of the left. That their Constitution might have
some problems isn't the issue here.
What is at issue is the government of a whole country and its
military unanimously ejected a man who had (1) falsified
election ballots, (2) improperly ordered the military to enforce an
unconstitutional vote, and (3) violated a direct constitutional law
that prohibits a second term.
That they screwed up in ejecting him from the country afterwards
(while he was an ordinary Honduran citizen) is beside the
point--everything else was constitutionally adherent as indicated
by the CRS.
We have two concepts at play here: rule of law vs. dictatorship by
persona. That some have said he was "democratically elected" is
irrelevant. If George W. Bush tried something similar to this in
this country, I assure you, the people defending Zelaya currently
would have a problem.
This was not a "coup" and the Obama administration royally messed
this one up. The cognitive dissonance you hear from the left is the
realization that their "experienced" Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton and Grand Savior Obama would rather defend militant leftist
authoritarians than rule of law.
|9.24.09 @ 5:26PM|#
Thanks for playing, Geotpf. You provided a sterling example
of getting pwned on a comment board.
Really, Geotpf, you should stop while you're way the fuck
behind.
|9.24.09 @ 5:43PM|#
What's the point of a trial when the supreme court is 15 to 0 for getting the guy out of there? If civil war hasn't broken out yet, I doubt it will. Micheletti is from Zelays's party, and despite Chavez's best efforts, I haven't seen much unrest. And the press would definately show it if it was happening.
|9.24.09 @ 5:44PM|#
Grrr!
IT WAS NOT A COUP!
The way this administration handled the constitutional crisis in
Honduras angers me no friggin' end.
I expected the health care reform nonsense. I expected a climate
change power grab. I didn't expect the administration to back a
wannabe presidente de por vida who committed treason as defined by
his own country's constitution.
Read this and
Fausta's follow up
post and be very ashamed of our foreign policy diplomacy.
|9.24.09 @ 5:46PM|#
The Obama administration too has turned the screws on the de
facto jure government in Tegucigalpa, which
forced Zelaya out of the country after his administration ignored a
supreme court decision halting a plebiscite on extending term
limits:
FIFY Michael. Grrr!
|9.24.09 @ 5:48PM|#
Oopies. My previous* should look like
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Obama administration too has turned the screws on the de
factojure government in Tegucigalpa, which forced Zelaya out of the country after his administration ignored a supreme court decision halting a plebiscite on extending term limits:
FIFY Michael. Grrr!
----------------------------------------------------------------
* I wish we had a preview funcion around here,
|9.24.09 @ 5:51PM|#
I think what they ought to do (and likely will have to do) is
reinstate him, wait until he attempts to push forward his
unconstitutional referendum again, and then remove him
legally.
Yes, it seems like a damn waste of time. However, it's probably the
mechanism most likely to resolve the crisis peacefully.
The danger in delaying this action is that it'll improve the
chances he'll be able to force through his referendum anyway.
Tony|9.24.09 @ 5:55PM|#
No country currently recognizes Micheletti as the legitimate head of state of Honduras, and 192 UN nations and all members of the OAS support reinstating Zelaya--who is, of course, no real friend of the U.S. Zelaya, after having a resignation letter forged, was exiled after being kidnapped by the Honduran military, which was an illegal action. The action has been universally recognized as an undemocratic act. Obama doesn't really have much to gain by Zelaya's reinstatement, so I think we can rule out every motive beyond agreeing with the rest of the world that this fits the definition of a coup and the legitimate leader should be reinstated.
|9.24.09 @ 5:59PM|#
I think what they ought to do (and likely will have to do)
is reinstate him, wait until he attempts to push forward his
unconstitutional referendum again, and then remove him
legally.
He was removed from office legally.
He wasn't removed from the country legally.
Charge him, release him on bond, make it clear he can never hold
the office of Presidency again, and let him fade into
irrelevance.
The opinions of the OAS and the UN are meaningless on the issue of
legitimacy and constitutionality.
Random Dude|9.24.09 @ 5:59PM|#
@James Ard:
"despite Chavez's best efforts, I haven't seen much unrest. And the
press would definately show it if it was happening."
Sadly, that does
not seem to be the case.
(Unless of course you are actually in Honduras, in which case you
obviously are more aware of this...)
|9.24.09 @ 6:10PM|#
I should have checked my paper before posting. The WSJ is one of very few sources with decent info on what's going on down there.
|9.24.09 @ 6:12PM|#
Fuck Tony and every leftist dicttor loving fuckwad who supports
what Hillary and Obama are doing to strangle Honduran democracy in
it's crib.
Fuck you all very much.
JB|9.24.09 @ 6:27PM|#
'But, but the the WaPo and NYT call it a coup so it must be a
coup!!!1!1'
'It's what plants crave!'
|9.24.09 @ 7:09PM|#
Tulpa, great job.
Sheesh, I agree with Moynihan.
Geoptf and Tony: Admit it-the two of you have never met a socialist
who is hell bent on disregarding a nation's constitution in his
quest for more and more power that yous haven't liked.
The Libertarian Guy|9.24.09 @ 7:25PM|#
"Israeli mercenaries" are torturing him with radiation?
Yeah, and the King of Norway uses my penis as a radio transmitter
to broadcast anti-Semitic lesbian meatloaf recipies to Soupy Sales
and Marvin Hamlisch.
(swiped from George Carlin... kudos, wherever you are.)
Paul|9.24.09 @ 7:55PM|#
An Honduran congressman said their only mistake with Zelaya was
dumping him out of the plane in his pajamas instead of arresting
him.
Hear-hear!
Paul|9.24.09 @ 7:55PM|#
"Israeli mercenaries" are torturing him with
radiation?
"High frequency" radiation.
MNG|9.24.09 @ 7:57PM|#
"the Wall Street Journal reports that "roving bands of his
supporters [have] set up roadblocks around the capital, smashed
windows, and engaged in sporadic battles with police and army
troops"
I thought I heard on the radio that the other side was engaged in
some anti-liberty shenanigans too, such as a curfew.
The Libertarian Guy|9.24.09 @ 8:02PM|#
Oh, yeah, right... "high frequency" radiation. Targeted
specifically at him. From Israel. Right. Got it.
My God, what is it with insane left-wing despots?
|9.24.09 @ 8:18PM|#
MNG,
This may come as a shock to you, but in America one of the first
things the government does when bands of people start rioting is
impose a curfew.
But you knew that, right?
The Libertarian Guy|9.24.09 @ 8:27PM|#
Anti-liberty shenanigans?
That's like saying a serial killer is just involved in ongoing
murder-based mischief.
|9.24.09 @ 9:39PM|#
glad to read most understand that this was not a coup, despite
the rest of the worlds guvmints saying it is.
I agree with having him arrested and released on bond, but the
problem is the whole mob of supporters thing. All them
South/Central American countries seem quite capable of riots when
some worshiped thug needs 'em. Don't need a radiated Super Zelya
leading a mob rule.
[Low frequency radiation would be loud music I guess? lol....]
Mad Max|9.24.09 @ 10:01PM|#
'Yes. He should not have been removed from the country itself.
He should have been removed from office and charged in
court.'
Well, it seems he's back in Honduras now, holed up in the Brazilian
embassy. The Honduran government seems to genuinely regret the
attempted exile, and claims it would be happy to have the Z-man
stay in the country, in accomodations provided by the government
itself.
From the CRS report cited by John Thacker, it seems the Honduran
Congress has the power to interpret the country's constitution, and
by voting that the Z-man had violated the constitution and should
be removed, Congress was exercising that power.
The Supreme Court, apparently, relinquished jurisdiction over the
Z-man once Congress made him a private citizen, turning the trial
on the criminal charges over to the local criminal court, as with
other private citizens. (The previous basis for the Supreme Court's
jurisdiction was that it can hear cases against high officials like
the President).
So the Honduran Constitution authorizes Congress to make
Constitutional interpretations (and also to deal with executive
misbehavior), and Congress has used its interpretations to remove
the Z-man from office.
But never mind the actual Constitution of Honduras, or the body
authorized to interpret that Constitution - we know it's a coup
because a bunch of diplomats call it a coup. And who appoints and
instructs the diplomats in every country? The executive branch in
that country.
Gosh, maybe the diplomats are not being fully impartial when,
responside to instructions to the executive branch in government
throughout the world, they decide to protect an errant
executive-branch head from removal?
MNG|9.24.09 @ 10:21PM|#
"But never mind the actual Constitution of Honduras, or the body
authorized to interpret that Constitution"
Max, wtf do you know about the Constitution of Honduras? You're
just parroting some blog you've read.
I find it highly unlikely that the Honduran constitution authorizes
the Supreme Court to order the military to simply physically kick
out a President who is trying to carry out a poll/referendum which
the Supreme court declares illegal. What part of the Honduran
Constitution calls for that expert?
|9.24.09 @ 10:31PM|#
that's been covered already, no mechanism for removal but
required when an attempt is made to change term limits.
Attempts referendum, strike one
ignores Supreme court ruling, strike two
agitates for supporters to defy army, court
!yer out!
Should not have deported him, I do sympathize with earlier views of
having him deplaned without landing though, old school...
jtuf|9.24.09 @ 10:37PM|#
MNG, do you also want Obama to intervene in Paterson, NJ?
Via the NJ Libertarian Party website.
NJ city considers adult curfew after crime spate
8/18/2009, 4:38 p.m. EDT The Associated Press
(AP) - PATERSON, N.J. - Curfews might not be just for kids anymore in one city in northern New Jersey.
Officials in Paterson are considering one for people of all ages in a bid to curb violence after a spate of deadly shootings.
Several experts say they believe it would be the nation's first curfew of its type to include adults. The state ACLU says it would open Paterson to legal action.
The curfew would last for two months and would bar people from loitering outside from midnight to 7 a.m. Violators would face up to a $2,000 fine and 90 days in jail.
|9.24.09 @ 10:41PM|#
Would it have been better if he had been shot and dumped in the
forest? Maybe so but what is going on here is a (by their
standards) legitimate exercise of authority and it is not for "the
community of nations" to decide that this (mostly) peaceful
transfer of power is right or wrong.
Or maybe everyone would have preferred a long and destabilizing
civil war over this?
anonymous|9.24.09 @ 10:44PM|#
"If there was some sort of court proceeding prior to the
impeachment, that would be one thing. Nobody stuck a gun in Bill
Clinton's face and dragged him out of the White House."
No one was concerned about Democrats rioting and becoming violent
in his defense. The military forced Zelaya to leave so quickly and
unexpectedly mainly to limit the civil unrest. Now that he's back,
things will go downhill rapidly.
Zelaya's a particularly bizarre person for presumably honestly
left-wing politicians to pin their hopes on, considering his
right-wing business background. His about-face on policy doesn't
suggest conversion, it suggests that he places personal power above
ideology and is using unions and the downtrodden the same way he
used the right-wing establishment before. He's a Fontaine, if you
ask me.
MNG|9.24.09 @ 10:50PM|#
Max
http://weeksnotice.blogspot.com/2009/07/honduras-summing-up-some-basic-points.html
jtuf-goes a bit further than NJ style curfews, eh? Let me cite a
recent release by Human Rights Watch, an organization which
Moynihan has linked to in order to demonstrate Chavez's crappy
human rights record
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/08/25/honduras-rights-report-shows-need-increased-international-pressure
Reports of censorship of media outlets, detention of dissenters,
suspension of rights...when its Chavez Moynihan goes apeshit, but
he leaves any mention of this sort of thing by the coup government
out of his post...
jtuf|9.24.09 @ 10:59PM|#
I just checked the Buenos Aires Herald. It had two new
articles.
Zelaya
says he has already began to talk with Honduran political
sectors
and
Honduras
lifts curfew
A delegation from the Organization of American States is on the
case. So is Jimmy Carter.
Joe M|9.24.09 @ 11:01PM|#
Max, wtf do you know about the Constitution of Honduras? You're just parroting some blog you've read.
Jackass, he's referring to the
Law Library of Congress Report on this precise issue. That's
not just "some blog."
D.R.M.|9.25.09 @ 1:08AM|#
Constitution of Honduras:
ARTICULO 239.- El ciudadano que haya desempeñado la titularidad del
Poder Ejecutivo no podrá ser Presidente o Vicepresidente de la
República.
El que quebrante esta disposición o proponga su reforma, así como
aquellos que lo apoyen directa o indirectamente, cesarán de
inmediato en el desempeño de sus respectivos cargos y quedarán
inhabilitados por diez (10) años para el ejercicio de toda función
pública.
In English:
ARTICLE 239 - No citizen that has already served as head of the
Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President.
Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those
that support such violation directly or indirectly, will
immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any
public office for a period of 10 years.
------------
Did Zelaya propose a reform of the Honduran Constitution, without
exempting any articles?
Yes.
Does proposing reform of Article 239 immediately, without any
outside action, end the term of office of anyone who so
proposes?
Yes.
Is Zelaya the constitutional President of Honduras?
No; he ceased to be President the moment he proposed constitutional
reform without exempting Article 239.
Was Zelaya victim of a coup d'état?
A coup is an unconstitutional deposition of a legitimate
government. Since Zelaya was no longer the legitimate President, it
is impossible for his exile from the country to have been a coup
d'état, no matter how illegal and improper the expulsion may have
been in other respects.
Can Zelaya be restored to power?
Not without blatantly violating Article 239 of the Constitution of
Honduras, which utterly forbids him from holding any office in the
next ten years or ever again holding the office of President.
jester|9.25.09 @ 4:21AM|#
I heard there was a nativist coup on Isla Clipperton. Where is that in the news?!!
jester|9.25.09 @ 4:29AM|#
This is Honduras folks. Let them do things their way. In the aftermath, either cancel your Roatan Diving Adventure or continue your Mayan culture study featuring Copan. It's your call. The US should stay out of this on all terms. The Idaho Statesman should be our liaison. FGS.
jester|9.25.09 @ 4:36AM|#
"So is Jimmy Carter"
So the racist fuck is in Honduras drumming up more self-praise.
Good God, what a monumental dick.Even Yucca Mountain isn't toxic
enough for his eventual burial. Ew! What a creepy human being.
jester|9.25.09 @ 4:42AM|#
I have been going to Honduras for years (since 1991). Honestly, it has its own issues. We should stay clear of the place other than having a mano a mano free trade policy. And get our troops safely home!
Sean Healy|9.25.09 @ 7:22AM|#
All I can say is I'm delighted that, as a result of the political instability, the USA and Honduras will now likely play their World Cup qualifier at a neutral venue instead of the hellhole that is San Pedro Sula.
huangzhixian35|9.25.09 @ 9:45AM|#
HTTP://WWW.ICFSHOP.COM =====FREE SHIPPING FREE======
BIKINI $25. OUR COMMITMENT,CUSTOMER IS GOD.
http://www.icfshop.com
All the products are free shipping, and the the price is enticement
, and also can accept the paypal payment.we can ship within 24
hours after your payment.
accept the paypal
free shipping
competitive price
any size available
our price:coach chanel gucci LV handbags $32coogi DG edhardy gucci
t-shirts $15CA edhardy vests.paul smith shoes $35jordan dunk af1
max gucci shoes $33EDhardy gucci ny New Era cap $15coach okely
CHANEL DG Sunglass $16.our price: (Bikini)coach chanel gucci LV
handbags $32.coogi DG edhardy gucci t-shirts $15.CA edhardy
vests.paul smith shoes $35.jordan dunk af1 max gucci shoes
$33.EDhardy gucci ny New Era cap $15.coach okely CHANEL DG Sunglass
$16
http://www.icfshop.com =====FREE SHIPPING FREE=====
I wish you a happy shopping and happy every day!
|9.25.09 @ 10:58AM|#
I find it highly unlikely that the Honduran constitution
authorizes the Supreme Court to order the military to simply
physically kick out a President who is trying to carry out a
poll/referendum which the Supreme court declares illegal. What part
of the Honduran Constitution calls for that expert?
I believe that several people have already cited article 329. If
you're looking for where the constitution authorizes the Supreme
Court to enforce that article the way it did, you might check out
article 304: "Corresponds to the courts apply the laws to specific
cases, try and run the court. In no time may be established courts
of emergency." (The translation is a bit creaky, but the meaning
isn't hard to figure out. The authority of the Honduran Supreme
Court to act as it did is at least as clear as the authority of the
federal judiciary to exercise judicial review to invalidate acts of
Congress, or to order the Florida authorities to stop recounting
the ballots.)
|9.25.09 @ 11:21AM|#
Honduras's removal of its ex-president from office was legal
under Articles 239 and 272 of its Constitution, which do not
require trial or impeachment for certain offenses, and give the
military certain enforcement responsibilities.
Honduras's ex-president was arrested on orders of the Honduras
Supreme Court.
Many legal commentators and foreign policy analysts have said that
the ex-president's removal was legal, including Octavio Sanchez,
Miguel Estrada, Dan Miller, Kim Holmes, and William Ratliff.
While his removal from office was clearly valid, his subsequent
exile from his country may have violated Article 81 of the Honduras
Constitution.
His removal was not a "coup" because a coup is the
"unconstitutional deposition of a legitimate government by a small
group," and he was validly removed by Honduras's legitimate
government -- its Supreme Court with the assent of its Congress --
was himself no longer the legitimate government, and was removed
not with the support of a small group, but rather with the support
of a unanimous supreme court (consistently mostly of justices of
his own party), an almost-unanimous Congress, and much of society
(including the Human Rights Ombudsman, the Catholic Archbishop,
most of the middle class, most of the rural poor, and virtually all
business owners).
Tony|9.25.09 @ 12:56PM|#
When not a single country on the planet supports a government as legitimate, arguing that it is in fact legitimate is pretty academic.
|9.25.09 @ 1:31PM|#
The next legit step would then for elections to be held. I wonder if the US will recognize the elections though since it's backing Zeleya. Sounds like Zeleya himself might not recognize it. http://www.newsy.com/videos/manuel_zelaya_returns_part_three. At least that's what's Micheletti is suggesting.
|9.25.09 @ 2:18PM|#
America needs to stop interfering in Latin America and close all bases on foreign soil. China must be destroyed.
The Libertarian Guy|9.25.09 @ 10:25PM|#
Tony,
The Honduran constitution says "thou shalt only be president once".
This prick tried to end-run it, setting himself up as dictator. He
got what he deserved, just as any American president should if one
decided to go rogue and set themselves up for more than their
allotted term(s).
Seems pretty cut-and-dried. What's your problem?
Zelaya was ATTEMPTING A COUP. There, fixed it for ya.
The Libertarian Guy|9.25.09 @ 10:31PM|#
Besides, Tony, this would-be dictator actually *chuckle* thinks
the Israelis are aiming *snicker* radiation guns at him.
If that isn't proof the Honduran gov't did the right thing in
getting rid of him, I don't know what is.
jester|9.26.09 @ 7:34AM|#
It's Honduras, folks. Let them sort things out themselves.
Venezuela sorted things out. Brazil sorted things out. Peru sorted
things out. Ecuador sorted things out. Argentina sorted things out.
Nicaragua sorted things out.
If I gave a fuck (and I do but not enough to become a mercenary;
but see below), I'd become a mercenary. Otherwise, I encourage free
trade with any and all fucked-up oligarchies. It's our gain and
their loss.
jester|9.26.09 @ 7:41AM|#
Honduras has a constitution? Isn't democracy more
important?
That's what you're saying. Tony et al. You're correct. Put in a
pile of shit to rule overbearingly.
Proof that libertarians hate brown people. But that would destroy
your dialogue.
Not in your eyes.
jester|9.26.09 @ 7:46AM|#
Personally, I am all for dictatorship, if it is of the benign Castro form. Results: 100% literacy; recognition of homosexuality; free artistic expression; abundance of everything.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245