# Honduras: Who's correct? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 29, 2009, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305 "2009-06-29T02:13:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/141 "2009-07-01T19:12:39Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > The side that broke into the White House before dawn, threatened to shoot Bush if he didn’t drop his cell phone, marched him in his pajamas to an airport, and dumped him on the runway of an airport in another country. Duh. And the other side is… If Bush had decided that term limits were passe’, and announced a referendum to allow him to stay in power (a referendum which was reportedly complete with intimidation, ballot fixing, and other shenanigans), and the congress unanimously opposed him and the Supreme Court ordered him to stop, and then he demanded that the military take over and fly the ballots around, and the military refused, so he fired the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and then he used some RNC goons to break into the ballot warehouse and take the ballots, then cut a deal with Mexico to use Mexican planes to fly the ballots because the military wouldn’t do it… If all that was going on, and the Congress ordered Bush forcibly removed from the While House, and the Supreme Court signed off on it as being a constitutionally-approved move, and the speaker of the house was declared President according to the constitution… Would you still have a problem with it? ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/142 "2009-07-01T19:18:20Z")
I have a problem with hypotheticals based on the blatant misinterpretation of facts designed to try to catch your opponents in some sort of moral quandary. ---
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/143 "2009-07-01T19:21:18Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > And the other side is… > > If Bush had decided that term limits were passe’, and announced a referendum to allow him to stay in power (a referendum which was reportedly complete with intimidation, ballot fixing, and other shenanigans), and the congress unanimously opposed him and the Supreme Court ordered him to stop, and then he demanded that the military take over and fly the ballots around, and the military refused, so he fired the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and then he used some RNC goons to break into the ballot warehouse and take the ballots, then cut a deal with Mexico to use Mexican planes to fly the ballots because the military wouldn’t do it… Except for the fact that Zelaya did nothing of the sort, as has been explained , **with cites** , multiple times in this very thread. > [@](#): > > If all that was going on, and the Congress ordered Bush forcibly removed from the While House, and the Supreme Court signed off on it as being a constitutionally-approved move, and the speaker of the house was declared President according to the constitution… Except that the Honduran congress did not do that (I think it was the SC), except that the correct move would have been to start impeachment proceedings, except that the VP and not the speaker should be declared president according to the constitution… So, yes, except for being completely wrong I guess you are right. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 7:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/144 "2009-07-01T19:27:09Z")
As you may have noticed, **Sam** , there is some question afoot as to whether or not your recitation actually fits the facts. I don’t know what those facts are, there is considerable smoke and mirrors here. What evidence can you offer that the “facts” offered by a news outlet that most aligns with your own viewpoint is more truthy that the other? We lefties have been right rather often, in case it has escaped your attention. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/145 "2009-07-01T19:35:42Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > It is a testament to the idiocy of this nation’s Left thatg I can no longer tell if this was a joke. Says the guy that demonstrated that knows diddly squat about history. It is joke anyhow, it points to the fact that the ones that you disdain are correct in this case. As I mentioned before, when the left in Ecuador took over they were the idiots. Even if the mayoralty of the population was in favor of the coup. Today, even if a good chunk of Hondurans think that this is a great thing to do they are the idiots. 2 crimes are clear to me: 1. I can not find in their constitution anything that would allow the courts\*\* to order the removal and expulsion of a head of state\*\* (So much for habeas corpus). If they were doing this in the proper way they should have captured him and put him on trial… **But this creates a problem, it would then be clear that he is not resigning. So enter crime 2** : 2. **A false document was created** to show to congress that Zelaya had resigned. With that the congress acted to select the puppet. A puppet that got selected based on a false document. Those crimes are way more serious than any pumped allegations mentioned against Zelaya, but even here I would think that the most likely solution will be to negotiate and to not allow any of the parties to succeed, and a new conciliatory candidate will have to be named. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/146 "2009-07-01T19:57:06Z")
> [@Frodo](#): > > Except for the fact that Zelaya did nothing of the sort, as has been explained , **with cites** , multiple times in this very thread. That’s interesting, because I just went back through this thread again, and I can find no such cites. There’s a foreign language blog that Redfury linked to, but not being able to read it I have no idea what it says, what its bias is, or anything else about it. The other cite list is DailyKos, which I countered with a cite from _National Review_. You know, for balance. Especially since the DailyKos entry does not even attempt to present the other side’s point of view, or even to report on facts that seem to be generally agreed on, such as that the Supreme Court declared the referendum unconstitutional and that the military was operating under court order. Of the other cites listed in this thread, the _Telegraph_, quotes the Honduran Supreme Court: > [@](#): > > “Today’s events originate from a court order by a competent judge. The armed forces, in charge of supporting the constitution, acted to defend the state of law and have been forced to apply legal dispositions against those who have expressed themselves publicly and acted against the dispositions of the basic law,” the country’s highest court said. Unless you’re suggesting that the Supreme Court is the body that staged the ‘coup’… They themselves say that the military was _forced_ to do this by court order. The BBC cite merely repeats the claims of both sides. The Wall Street Journal cite repeats the chain of events that I listed in my first post. Another cite, “Global IT News”, doesn’t actually appear to have anything on it about this. Not that I could find, anyway. So… So far I haven’t seen a single cite that backed up the claims in this thread, but several that back up mine. I’ve been trying to find an actual factual accounting online, and haven’t been able to find one outside of various editorials and opinion pages. Would someone have such a cite? Say, from the Associated Press or some other respected news outfit? > [@](#): > > Except that the Honduran congress did not do that (I think it was the SC), except that the correct move would have been to start impeachment proceedings, except that the VP and not the speaker should be declared president according to the constitution… I agree that impeachment proceedings seem to be the correct mechanism, but if the claims are true that Venezuela was heavily influencing this (one of the claims against the referendum is that Venezuela was flooding the borders with people to stack the vote in Zelaya’s favor), then maybe it was felt that a traditional impeachment could lead to violence from Chavez and others. I don’t know. I would certainly like to hear from the new Honduran government why they felt it necessary to do what they did. > [@](#): > > So, yes, except for being completely wrong I guess you are right. If you keep saying that enough, maybe you can get everyone to believe it. Until then, how about citing some facts? If you haven’t noticed, I’m still not claiming to know the ‘truth’ here. So far, the truth seems somewhat slippery, and the real reporting on this is amazingly weak. So basically what we have is a lot of editorial comment from both ends of the political spectrum, and the stated claims of Zelaya and the new government, both of which I assume are biased. I’d like to hear some actual facts from reporters on the ground in Honduras, from non-aligned sources in the government, the CIA or NSA, British intelligence, whatever. Something more than 'He said - she said" ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/147 "2009-07-01T20:01:30Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > As you may have noticed, **Sam** , there is some question afoot as to whether or not your recitation actually fits the facts. I don’t know what those facts are, there is considerable smoke and mirrors here. What evidence can you offer that the “facts” offered by a news outlet that most aligns with your own viewpoint is more truthy that the other? We actually agree that there seems to be considerable smoke and mirrors, and that the ‘facts’ seem rather fuzzy. I just said the same thing in my last message. > [@](#): > > We lefties have been right rather often, in case it has escaped your attention. Oh, that’s rich. How’s that stimulus working out? It’s good to see that opening dialog with Iran and North Korea would pay off like the left said it would, huh? But at least there’s no more rendition, no more warrantless wiretapping, and all the Gitmo prisoners are free. Because the left said that if Obama were elected, he’d fix all that stuff. Now that the left is in power, the world is a much happier place. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/148 "2009-07-01T20:03:46Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > That’s interesting, because I just went back through this thread again, and I can find no such cites. There’s a foreign language blog that Redfury linked to, but not being able to read it I have no idea what it says, what its bias is, or anything else about it. The other cite list is DailyKos, which I countered with a cite from _National Review_. You know, for balance. Especially since the DailyKos entry does not even attempt to present the other side’s point of view, or even to report on facts that seem to be generally agreed on, such as that the Supreme Court declared the referendum unconstitutional and that the military was operating under court order. > Of the other cites listed in this thread, the _Telegraph_, quotes the Honduran Supreme Court: > > Unless you’re suggesting that the Supreme Court is the body that staged the ‘coup’… They themselves say that the military was _forced_ to do this by court order. Just by taking habeas corpus into account, the conclusion is inescapable: Either the courts or the army broke the law by not putting the president under custody or by ordering the expulsion of the president and to “obtain” a resignation from Zelaya. > [@](#): > > The BBC cite merely repeats the claims of both sides. > > The Wall Street Journal cite repeats the chain of events that I listed in my first post. > > Another cite, “Global IT News”, doesn’t actually appear to have anything on it about this. Not that I could find, anyway. > > So… So far I haven’t seen a single cite that backed up the claims in this thread, but several that back up mine. > I’ve been trying to find an actual factual accounting online, and haven’t been able to find one outside of various editorials and opinion pages. Would someone have such a cite? Say, from the Associated Press or some other respected news outfit? > > I agree that impeachment proceedings seem to be the correct mechanism, but if the claims are true that Venezuela was heavily influencing this (one of the claims against the referendum is that Venezuela was flooding the borders with people to stack the vote in Zelaya’s favor), then maybe it was felt that a traditional impeachment could lead to violence from Chavez and others. I don’t know. I would certainly like to hear from the new Honduran government why they felt it necessary to do what they did. > > If you keep saying that enough, maybe you can get everyone to believe it. Until then, how about citing some facts? > > If you haven’t noticed, I’m still not claiming to know the ‘truth’ here. So far, the truth seems somewhat slippery, and the real reporting on this is amazingly weak. So basically what we have is a lot of editorial comment from both ends of the political spectrum, and the stated claims of Zelaya and the new government, both of which I assume are biased. I’d like to hear some actual facts from reporters on the ground in Honduras, from non-aligned sources in the government, the CIA or NSA, British intelligence, whatever. Something more than 'He said - she said" Logic is better, it says that there was a coup and that the authorities resorted to bigger crimes to get their way against Zelaya. BTW even in Spanish it is clear that the date on the resignation document is evidence enough to show that a crime was committed. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/149 "2009-07-01T20:04:49Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Those crimes are way more serious than any pumped allegations mentioned against Zelaya, but even here I would think that the most likely solution will be to negotiate and to not allow any of the parties to succeed, and a new conciliatory candidate will have to be named. Really? It seems to me that both sides are somewhat guilty, from what we know so far. Zelaya started it by violating the constitution, refusing to accept a Supreme Court ruling and an order of Congress, then firing his own military leader and trying to do an end-run around the entire process. The government responded to legally remove him, but then perhaps overstepped their bounds and had him removed from the country, then perhaps forged a resignation letter to try to quell possible violence in the aftermath. Which action is ‘worse’ is more of an editorial comment than a statement of fact at this point, don’t you think? ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/150 "2009-07-01T20:06:35Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Logic is better, it says that there was a coup and that the authorities resorted to bigger crimes to get their way against Zelaya. Okay… So now you admit there are no real cites to these facts, but that ‘logic’ is better? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/151 "2009-07-01T20:07:23Z")
Believe it or not, some contards (not here, but on other boards I frequent) are actually calling Zelaya a Communist, and asserting that as an established fact.. Apparently the thinking (if that is not too strong a word) is that any leader who for whatever reason gets friendly with Castro (who is a Communist) and Chavez (who is not) **must** be a Communist. Or something like that. [_The Nation_](http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090713/grandin) has an interesting take: > [@](#): > > Whatever the reason, Zelaya shifted course, and over the past two years he has adopted a progressive agenda. As a solution to the disastrous “war on drugs,” which has turned Central America into a well-traversed trans-shipment corridor for narcotraficantes–profitable for some, deadly for many–he has proposed the legalization of some narcotics. Earlier this year at the Summit of the Americas, he took the lead in pushing Barack Obama to normalize relations with Cuba. And he has steered his country into both the Bolivarian Alternative to the Americas and Petrocaribe, two regional economic alliances backed by Venezuela meant to wean Latin America off its extreme dependence on the US market. > > This left turn is less ideological than pragmatic. Honduras is so broke it “can’t even build a road without getting a loan from the World Bank,” Zelaya once complained. But that money comes in “dribbles, held up years by paperwork” and often accompanied by onerous terms. In contrast, he said, Petrocaribe financing for infrastructure investment came all at once, at extremely low interest, with no conditions, which helped free up other scarce funds for social services. Through Petrocaribe, Venezuela also provides Honduras with 20,000 barrels of crude oil per day, also on very generous terms. > > For those who presume to rule behind the scenes, Zelaya took a step too far when he began to push for the convocation of a constituent assembly in order to democratize Honduras’s notoriously exclusionary political system. Expectedly, these efforts were opposed by the national Congress and the Supreme Court, both of which are controlled by an inbred clique of career politicians and judges invested in keeping Honduran politics restricted–including members of Zelaya’s Liberal Party. For its part, the US media seem intent on reporting on events in Honduras through the prism of its obsession with Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez. The New York Times, for instance, ran an op-ed by free-market ideologue Alvaro Vargas Llosa, who claimed that the most unfortunate aspect of the coup is not that it derailed Honduran democracy but–wait for it–that it has allowed Chávez to defend democracy and thus claim the “moral high ground.” Vargas Llosa describes Zelaya as a man of privilege, an “heir to the family fortune” who had “devoted decades to his agriculture and forestry enterprises” and who had run for president on a conservative platform that included supporting CAFTA. Misleadingly, Vargas Llosa attributes Zelaya’s political turn not to the absolute failure of CAFTA and the fiasco of the “war on drugs” but to Chávez’s seductions. The US media have also falsely yet unanimously presented Zelaya’s moves as a power grab, an effort to end term limits to allow him to run for re-election. But the referendum Zelaya was pushing–which prompted the coup–asked citizens only if there should be a vote on “whether to hold a Constituent National Assembly that will approve a new political Constitution.” In other words, Hondurans weren’t being asked to vote on term limits or even on revising the Constitution. They were simply being asked to vote on whether or not to have a vote on revising the Constitution, with the terms of that revision being left to an elected assembly. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/152 "2009-07-01T20:07:51Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > We actually agree that there seems to be considerable smoke and mirrors, and that the ‘facts’ seem rather fuzzy. I just said the same thing in my last message. > > Oh, that’s rich. How’s that stimulus working out? It’s good to see that opening dialog with Iran and North Korea would pay off like the left said it would, huh? But at least there’s no more rendition, no more warrantless wiretapping, and all the Gitmo prisoners are free. Because the left said that if Obama were elected, he’d fix all that stuff. Now that the left is in power, the world is a much happier place. :rolleyes: Defending ignorant positions in the Honduras case does wonders for others to trust your say so’s. ---
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/153 "2009-07-01T20:08:47Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Really? It seems to me that both sides are somewhat guilty, from what we know so far. Zelaya started it by violating the constitution, refusing to accept a Supreme Court ruling and an order of Congress, then firing his own military leader and trying to do an end-run around the entire process. The government responded to legally remove him, but then perhaps overstepped their bounds and had him removed from the country, then perhaps forged a resignation letter to try to quell possible violence in the aftermath. > > Which action is ‘worse’ is more of an editorial comment than a statement of fact at this point, don’t you think? nopes. Military Coups are never right. “Perhaps” overstepped their bounds?, they fucking falsified a resignation letter!. If Zelaya was in the wrong, their opposition lost all moral high ground when they detained and expelled him. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/154 "2009-07-01T20:11:06Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Okay… So now you admit there are no real cites to these facts, but that ‘logic’ is better? I can read spanish and though you have tried to dismiss it, they offer a link to the “resignation” document. The date on the document is from 3 days before the coup and the president denies that he signed it. Just that requires that the congress stop and at least investigate the validity of the document, this was not done. As mentioned before, I do not expect right wingers to demand an explanation of their news sources as to why they are so misleading. They will still consider them reliable no matter what. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2009, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/155 "2009-07-01T20:33:12Z")
Here is the OAS unanimous resolution: > **[OAS :: Press Releases](https://www.oas.org/en/media_center/press_releases.asp)** > [@](#): > > RESOLUTION ON THE POLITICAL CRISIS IN HONDURAS > > (Adopted at the plenary session, held on July 1, 2009 and > pending to be revised by the Style Committee) > THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, > > GRAVELY CONCERNED about the political crisis in the Republic of Honduras as a result of the coup d’état against the government of President José Manuel Zelaya Rosales,which has produced an unconstitutional alteration of the democratic order; > > ``` > RECALLING Permanent Council resolutions CP/RES. 952 (1699/09) of June 26, 2009 and CP/RES. 953 (1700/09) of June 28, 2009, regarding the situation in Honduras; > > ``` > > CONVENED urgently by the Permanent Council in accordance with Article 20 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter; > > ``` > REITERATING the principles and purposes established in the Charter of the Organization of American States and the Inter-American Democratic Charter on the strengthening and preservation of the democratic institutional system in member states, as well as the importance of strict adherence to and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the principle of nonintervention in the internal affairs of other states; and > > ``` > > TAKING NOTE of the declarations by international organizations, sub-regional groups, and governments of the member states, > > RESOLVES: > > 1.To condemn vehemently the coup d’état staged against the constitutionally established Government of Honduras, and the arbitrary detention and expulsion from the country of the constitutional president José Manuel Zelaya Rosales, which has produced an unconstitutional alteration of the democratic order. > > 2.To reaffirm that President José Manuel Zelaya Rosales is the constitutional President of Honduras and to demand the immediate, safe, and unconditional return of the President to his constitutional functions. > > 3.To declare that no government arising from this unconstitutional interruption will be recognized, and to reaffirm that the representatives designated by the constitutional and legitimate government of President José Manuel Zelaya Rosales are the representatives of the Honduran State to the Organization of American States. > > 4.To instruct the Secretary General to undertake, together with representatives of various countries, diplomatic initiatives aimed at restoring democracy and the rule of law and the reinstatement of President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales, pursuant to Article 20 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter and report to the Special General Assembly on the results of the initiatives. Should these prove unsuccessful within 72 hours, the Special General Assembly shall forthwith invoke Article 21 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter to suspend Honduras’ membership. The UN was also unanimous. [http://www.reflector.com/news/nation/oas-gives-3-day-deadline-to-honduran-coup-leaders-691643.html](http://www.reflector.com/news/nation/oas-gives-3-day-deadline-to-honduran-coup-leaders-691643.html) > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON — Honduran coup leaders have three days to restore deposed President Manuel Zelaya to power, the Organization of American States said Wednesday, before Honduras risks being suspended from the group. > > OAS Secretary-General Jose Miguel Insulza delivered what he called “an ultimatum” as OAS talks regarding the crisis dragged into the early-morning hours. The talks began Tuesday afternoon. > > In a sharply worded resolution, the OAS said it vehemently condemned the coup and “the arbitrary detention and expulsion” of Zelaya. > > The coup, the resolution said, has produced an “unconstitutional alteration of the democratic order.” The envoys demanded Zelaya’s immediate and safe return to power. > > Calling Zelaya’s overthrow an “old-fashioned coup,” Insulza said: “We need to show clearly that military coups will not be accepted. We thought we were in an era when military coups were no longer possible in this hemisphere.” > > … > > The U.N. adopted a resolution calling on all 192 U.N. member states not to recognize any government in Honduras other than Zelaya’s. > > At the White House, press secretary Robert Gibbs said there are no plans to recall the U.S. ambassador to Honduras. > > The United States said it saw no acceptable solution to Zelaya’s ouster other than returning him to power. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly told reporters that the U.S. was still reviewing whether to cut off aid to the Central American nation. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2009, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/156 "2009-07-02T01:17:55Z")
Why am I not surprised to watch **Sam** storm in here to spread nonsensical rightwing propaganda that had already been debunked prior to his appearance? Because it is not the first time (nor I suspect the last) that I have seen him fall on the wrong side of history. Apparently he (as well as sources) is unaware that today’s LA is not the Latin America that was so easily kept under the thumb of by the trifecta formed by the oligarchies, corrupt military (many of them straight out of the nefarious School Of The Americas) and the interests of corporate America. For good or ill lots has changed over the past decade and today they have a number of Treaties (Grupo Rio, ALBA, SICA, MERCOSUR, CARICOM) that were entered into by LA nations with the notion of prioritizing their own interests as opposed to tagging along with the failed policies of old. Interestingly, all these alliances (intertwined in some cases) stood front and center, from the start, against this travesty – laughable in its inept execution – and left little room for maneuver within the once US-dominated OAS. Obama’s response, of course, was the only correct one in the face of both US credibility (which as we all know has taken a pounding over the past decade) and its adherence to democratic values. OTOH while the US doesn’t appear on the face of present evidence to have had an active involvement in the coup, it also strains belief that the CIA wasn’t aware of the unfolding events. Fact is Honduras had long been little more than a staging ground for any number of American-led operations in the region, what with the wink and a nod (read: very expensive bribe) to the unconstitutional Soto Cano base and the staggering number of Honduran officers that are graduates of the nefarious [SOA](http://www.soaw.org/) – including “coincidentally” the very general who lead the coup. What does it all mean? Well beyond the obvious fact that this is likely to become a major landmark in the future of US/LA relations, it will also set a clear line in the sand as to what democracies in Latin America are and are not allowed to do. Obviously again, if the coup is somehow “allowed” to succeed we are looking straight back into the barrel of history – a very cruel history that I am quite sure the great majority of Latin American people want distance themselves from. How long will this last? Hard to tell, but I do know that if Obama took the next logical and legal step (he did openly call it a “military coup”), the US would suspend any and all foreign aid to the de facto Honduran regime. Seeing as more than 70% of their income is either generated by trade with and/or aid from the United States, I simply can’t see them holding out much longer. As it is, aside the OAS ultimatum, maximum political and economic force is being projected by any number of organisms such as the World Bank and the Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID). On top of that, beyond the large number of ambassadors recalled by LA states, Spain’s Foreign Policy Minister, M.A. Moratinos has recently announced that he Spanish-led initiative to recall all EU ambassadors to Honduras has been adopted unanimously. Meanwhile the only response given by the Honduran clumsy usurpers has been to effectively implement a “estado de sitio”, literally a “state of siege” but better translated as goverment through marcial law. [Cite.](http://www.elpais.com/articulo/internacional/Gobierno/Micheletti/otorga/mayores/poderes/Ejercito/durante/toque/queda/elpepuint/20090701elpepuint_7/Tes) > [@](#): > > **Minuto a minuto, pasito a pasito, Honduras se va alejando de las libertades. Al secuestro por parte de un comando del Ejército del presidente Manuel Zelaya le siguió la implantación del toque de queda y, ayer, en una vuelta de tuerca más para sujetar el país, el nuevo Gobierno presidido por Roberto Micheletti propuso al Congreso la supresión de cinco libertades individuales…** > [@translation mine](#): > > _**Minute by minute, step by step, Honduras is distancing itself from freedom. The kidnaping of the president Manuel Zalaya by an Army commando was followed by the implementation of a curfew and, yesterday (for today EST) in another tightening of the screw to maintain hold of the country, the new Government presided by Roberto Micheletti porposed to Congress the supression of five individual rights…more at source.**_ Obviously, as dictatorships go, the proposal was quickly and unanimously passed. So, to any and all that still back this crude military/oligarchy take over, do so, but please, pretty please, leave any semblance of “democracy” behind your propaganda/“legal arguments”/pleads. IOW, drop the facade. You are only fooling yourselves. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2009, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/157 "2009-07-02T01:37:01Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > How long will this last? Hard to tell, but I do know that if Obama took the next logical and legal step (he did openly call it a “military coup”), the US would suspend any and all foreign aid to the de facto Honduran regime. I heard on the radio today the Admin announced it does not want to respond to this by any means that “would hurt Hondurans.” > [@RedFury](#): > > As it is, aside the OAS ultimatum, maximum political and economic force is being projected by any number of organisms such as the World Bank and the Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID). 😕 Politically speaking, wouldn’t the World Bank prefer the new government to Zelaya’s? ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2009, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/158 "2009-07-02T02:24:03Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Does she explain what happened? Apparently, this guy was elected, so the populace at large has undergone a profound shift in sentiment, if this is so. According to my GF, every four years the party in office gets thrown out due to corruption. Four years later, the other party gets thrown out due to corruption. IOW, Zeyala was elected four years ago because of the corruption of the other party, not because of any great popularity on his part. ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2009, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/159 "2009-07-02T02:25:27Z")
> [@Frodo](#): > > And if the vast majority of Hondurans wants him out, why bother with the coup?, why not wait for the elections?, something is missing Again, according to my GF, Zeyala, with the help of Hugo Chavez, was going to rig the upcoming election. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2009, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305/160 "2009-07-02T02:37:32Z")
> [@Frostillicus](#): > > Again, according to my GF, Zeyala, with the help of Hugo Chavez, was going to rig the upcoming election. I don’t think that they are correct when they ignore that the army and congress was against him. There is no way that was possible. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/honduras-whos-correct/501305.md?page=9)