Honduras Coup

[Mabus]

Honduras Tense After Army Coup - WSJ (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124619401378065339.html?mod=rss_com_mostcommenta rt)

A portion:

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras -- Soldiers stormed the house of leftist President Manuel Zelaya in a predawn raid Sunday, arresting him and removing him from power amid a growing crisis over Mr. Zelaya's plans to try to get re-elected.

"I was awakened by shots, and the yells of my guards, who resisted for about 20 minutes," Mr. Zelaya told a news conference at the San Jose airport in Costa Rica. "I came out in my pajamas, I'm still in my pajamas….when they came in, they pointed their guns at me and told me they would shoot if I didn't put down my cell phone."

Mr. Zelaya called the action a kidnapping, and said he was still president of Honduras.

The Honduran Congress named its leader, Roberto Micheletti, to replace President Manuel Zelaya following his military ouster and forced exile in Costa Rica. A resolution read on the floor of Congress accuses Mr. Zelaya of "manifest irregular conduct" and "putting in present danger the state of law," a reference to his refusal to obey a Supreme Court ruling against holding a constitutional referendum.

So Chavez looses an ally, and the US will have to take the side of the leftist (that was trying illegally to get rid of constitutional term limits in an effort to stay in power).

Will be interesting to watch this play out.

[Drew]

Why will we have to take the side of a leftist?

[Mabus]

Why will we have to take the side of a leftist?
If we do not, then Chavez and friends will state that we sponsored the coup, and that this is just another incident of American imperialism.

Statement from the White House:



THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
__________________________________________________ __________________________

For Immediate Release June 28, 2009

Statement from President on the situation in Honduras

"I am deeply concerned by reports coming out of Honduras regarding the detention and expulsion of President Mel Zelaya. As the Organization of American States did on Friday, I call on all political and social actors in Honduras to respect democratic norms, the rule of law and the tenets of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Any existing tensions and disputes must be resolved peacefully through dialogue free from any outside interference."

[Fallen]

Obama is in a perpetual state of deep concern with a lot of stuff going on the world. Must suck to be the president.

[Mabus]

Must suck to be the president.
Noticed the new graying hair? I wouldn't want the job.

[Kembal]

The Supreme Court in Honduras actually backed the coup, because it had already declared the constitutional referendum illegal.

I'm curious as to why they had to resort to a coup to stop it...did the Honduras legislature not have the abilty to stop it either via a law or impeachment?

[Dhuul]

Obama knew what he was getting into. CHEEL!

Yeah somebody is trying to take over Honduras? (I BLAME THE WEST! -Ahmedinja...ugh forget it)
Or is this completely internal?

[Kembal]

Obama knew what he was getting into. CHEEL!

Yeah somebody is trying to take over Honduras? (I BLAME THE WEST! -Ahmedinja...ugh forget it)
Or is this completely internal?

It's internal. The president was trying to throw out the constitution via a referendum that was scheduled for yesterday, and every other institution in the country opposed it. The referendum was illegal because the constitution prohibits referendums within six months of an upcoming election, and there's an election five months away.

[TheEschaton]

The leader of the coup was a graduate of the School of Americas, known for his barbaric tactics, and installed HIMSELF as leader until the Congress decided to put in someone else. They deposed a democratically elected President, and somehow you are in support of this?

-TheE-

[Atlanteax]

I'm pretty sure that the US will throw support behind the "new" President.

And our foreign policy team (or State department in general) will also flip the bird @ Chavez ...hahahahahh =D

The White House press release via Mabus is just for political consumption.

.

Eschaton, it's my understanding that the military leader's position in charge of Honduras was short-lived as control was quickly turned over to Congress which pointed its leader as interim president.

Only a far-leftist would be against the coup.

[4a6c1]

I hate that we have interests in any of the latin countries south of us. We do not belong there. They can work themselves out. Blanket generalization yes, but for the most part they have the same values and religious beginnings as us. They could make really useful allies if left to evolve normally on their own.

Venezuela is a good example of what happens when we take an infant democracy and make it a part of corporate America to feed our interests. Now look at what that coconut is doing with our oil rigs. Thats right, OURS. We built those rigs.

We should not be touching these politics with a ten foot pole. This is one of the only times America should do nothing except issue sanctions to keep things humane.

[TheEschaton]

The problem is, the rightists had the moral/legal high ground. Zalaya was defying a high court order (whether he was "justified" in disobeying is irrelevant, and draws the distinction between the moral vs. the legal high ground). And then they blew it by having a coup...

Obama has already said he would not recognize any government but Zalaya's (the exiled leftist), unless and until someone else is voted in when his terms legally ends, next year. I very much doubt that Obama will EVER support a military coup that installs a new president. They can't, not after a CIA backed coup in 2002 against Chavez changed and L.America hugely distrusts the U.S. in these matters. There's actually a very good article in Time about it.

-TheE-

[Parkbandit]

Hugo Chávez's coalition-building efforts suffered a setback yesterday when the Honduran military sent its president packing for abusing the nation's constitution.

It seems that President Mel Zelaya miscalculated when he tried to emulate the success of his good friend Hugo in reshaping the Honduran Constitution to his liking.

But Honduras is not out of the Venezuelan woods yet. Yesterday the Central American country was being pressured to restore the authoritarian Mr. Zelaya by the likes of Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, Hillary Clinton and, of course, Hugo himself. The Organization of American States, having ignored Mr. Zelaya's abuses, also wants him back in power. It will be a miracle if Honduran patriots can hold their ground.

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.

The top military commander, Gen. Romeo Vásquez Velásquez, told the president that he would have to comply. Mr. Zelaya promptly fired him. The Supreme Court ordered him reinstated. Mr. Zelaya refused.

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.

It remains to be seen what Mr. Zelaya's next move will be. It's not surprising that chavistas throughout the region are claiming that he was victim of a military coup. They want to hide the fact that the military was acting on a court order to defend the rule of law and the constitution, and that the Congress asserted itself for that purpose, too.

Mrs. Clinton has piled on as well. Yesterday she accused Honduras of violating "the precepts of the Interamerican Democratic Charter" and said it "should be condemned by all." Fidel Castro did just that. Mr. Chávez pledged to overthrow the new government.

Honduras is fighting back by strictly following the constitution. The Honduran Congress met in emergency session yesterday and designated its president as the interim executive as stipulated in Honduran law. It also said that presidential elections set for November will go forward. The Supreme Court later said that the military acted on its orders. It also said that when Mr. Zelaya realized that he was going to be prosecuted for his illegal behavior, he agreed to an offer to resign in exchange for safe passage out of the country. Mr. Zelaya denies it.

Many Hondurans are going to be celebrating Mr. Zelaya's foreign excursion. Street protests against his heavy-handed tactics had already begun last week. On Friday a large number of military reservists took their turn. "We won't go backwards," one sign said. "We want to live in peace, freedom and development."

Besides opposition from the Congress, the Supreme Court, the electoral tribunal and the attorney general, the president had also become persona non grata with the Catholic Church and numerous evangelical church leaders. On Thursday evening his own party in Congress sponsored a resolution to investigate whether he is mentally unfit to remain in office.

For Hondurans who still remember military dictatorship, Mr. Zelaya also has another strike against him: He keeps rotten company. Earlier this month he hosted an OAS general assembly and led the effort, along side OAS Secretary General José Miguel Insulza, to bring Cuba back into the supposedly democratic organization.

The OAS response is no surprise. Former Argentine Ambassador to the U.N. Emilio Cárdenas told me on Saturday that he was concerned that "the OAS under Insulza has not taken seriously the so-called 'democratic charter.' It seems to believe that only military 'coups' can challenge democracy. The truth is that democracy can be challenged from within, as the experiences of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and now Honduras, prove." A less-kind interpretation of Mr. Insulza's judgment is that he doesn't mind the Chávez-style coup.

The struggle against chavismo has never been about left-right politics. It is about defending the independence of institutions that keep presidents from becoming dictators. This crisis clearly delineates the problem. In failing to come to the aid of checks and balances, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Insulza expose their true colors.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124623220955866301.html

[TheEschaton]

LOL, the WSJ op-ed page would implement banana republics all across Latin America if it could, with profits coming directly to the States - they are a relatively biased opinion in all of this. :P

I like how they sandwiched Hillary's name inbetween Hugo and Daniel Ortega. ;) Just another sign of their inflammatory and misleading rhetoric.

-TheE-

[Atlanteax]

LOL, the WSJ op-ed page would implement banana republics all across Latin America if it could, with profits coming directly to the States - they are a relatively biased opinion in all of this. :P

I like how they sandwiched Hillary's name inbetween Hugo and Daniel Ortega. ;) Just another sign of their inflammatory and misleading rhetoric.

-TheE-

I'm at a lost to what you consider to be the problem with the WSJ piece?

You don't think the ouster of a mini-Chavez to be a good thing?

[Parkbandit]

LOL, the WSJ op-ed page would implement banana republics all across Latin America if it could, with profits coming directly to the States - they are a relatively biased opinion in all of this. :P

I like how they sandwiched Hillary's name inbetween Hugo and Daniel Ortega. ;) Just another sign of their inflammatory and misleading rhetoric.

-TheE-

Wait.. give me what you think happened in Honduras... because from what I've read, a military coup didn't take place, it was the democracy of Honduras that was upheld. President Zelaya attempted to circumvent the laws pertaining to his term limit and their Supreme Court and Congress went by the law and had him removed.

[Kembal]

Wait.. give me what you think happened in Honduras... because from what I've read, a military coup didn't take place, it was the democracy of Honduras that was upheld. President Zelaya attempted to circumvent the laws pertaining to his term limit and their Supreme Court and Congress went by the law and had him removed.

The military arrested the president and exiled him to Costa Rica. Congress then removed him from the position afterwards and installed the next in line for succession.

It was not a legal impeachment by any means. There's no question that Zelaya was acting illegally and in defiance of the Supreme Court, but the military should not have gotten involved in his removal, esp. after he fired the chief of the armed forces.

[Warriorbird]

" **** wanna bring the 80's back, that's okay with me that's where they made me at."
-Jay Z

[Parkbandit]

The military arrested the president and exiled him to Costa Rica. Congress then removed him from the position afterwards and installed the next in line for succession.

It was not a legal impeachment by any means. There's no question that Zelaya was acting illegally and in defiance of the Supreme Court, but the military should not have gotten involved in his removal, esp. after he fired the chief of the armed forces.

Didn't the Supreme Court and Congress instruct the Armed Forces to do what they did? What should have happened then.. with a President hell bent on serving as President longer than he is legally supposed to.. and him firing anyone opposing him?

I'm not intentionally trying to be obstinate.. I just see this less of a military coup and more of Democracy actually working as it was intended.

[Kembal]

Didn't the Supreme Court and Congress instruct the Armed Forces to do what they did? What should have happened then.. with a President hell bent on serving as President longer than he is legally supposed to.. and him firing anyone opposing him?

I'm not intentionally trying to be obstinate.. I just see this less of a military coup and more of Democracy actually working as it was intended.

The Supreme Court did do that, though I have no idea if its actually legal for the judicial branch in Honduras to issue orders to the armed forces. (certainly can't happen here)

What should've happened is that Congress should have impeached/removed him through whatever process they have, inaugurate his successor, and then if he refused to leave, have him arrested. (preferably by law enforcement, not by the military)

They flipped the order of actions, and that's what's troubling about it. For example, instead of doing the formal impeachement process of Clinton in 98 and going through a trial, what if Congress just told the military to arrest him and throw him out of the country, and then did the impeachment and removal later? That'd be in violation of the Constitution here, and I imagine it's in violation of the constitution there as well.

[Atlanteax]

Now lets hope that the Venezuelan military gets the gutso to do the same with the dictator Chavez.

[TheEschaton]

I don't know if I made this clear, but the Supreme Court of Honduras is not like the SCOTUS. It has long been known as one of the most corrupt Supreme Courts in the world, bought and paid for by the country's rich elite.

Like (I think?) I said earlier, whether President Zalaya has the right to disobey a (widely-recognized-as) corrupt Supreme Court is a different debate though, the plain fact is that he was deposed by the military, and exiled to another country, and a new government was put in place.

There is no country in the world that is recognizing this new government. Not even ours. The only people recognizing it are you right wing idiots. Grow up.

-TheE-

[TheEschaton]

Second of all, President Zalaya wanted to hold a referendum on whether there should be a vote to change the Constitution of Honduras. He wasn't changing it himself, he was suggesting there be a voted-upon amendment to it, which is, as far as I can tell, a legal way to change a constitution. If it's based on our type of constitution, at least.

[Mabus]

Second of all, President Zalaya wanted to hold a referendum on whether there should be a vote to change the Constitution of Honduras. He wasn't changing it himself, he was suggesting there be a voted-upon amendment to it, which is, as far as I can tell, a legal way to change a constitution. If it's based on our type of constitution, at least.
There is a federal law that no referendums be held within 6 months of the main federal election, from what I heard.

He was breaking this law, pushing to end term limits (like his pal Chavez did) in order to keep the presidency. His own party turned against him at that point, as did both other branches of their federal government and their military.

Would you have felt the same if GW had tried to force a constitutional change to nullify the 22nd Amendment by popular referendum in June of last year? How about in June of 2004? What if Putin had supported him and sent the ballots, in order to nullify the will of Congress and the SCOTUS, and Putin helped send a goon squad to break in and steal the legally confiscated ballots?

Should the Hondurans have went about this in a more "civilized" manner (impeachment trials, attempting to involve the UN and the World Court, etc.)? Yes. They should have. But by then the damage could well have been done, and another country could be under the rule of a leftist dictator.

[Mabus]

http://ibdeditorials.com/IMAGES/CARTOONS/toon063009.gif
I got a laugh out of it.

[Warriorbird]

I hate that we have interests in any of the latin countries south of us. We do not belong there. They can work themselves out. Blanket generalization yes, but for the most part they have the same values and religious beginnings as us. They could make really useful allies if left to evolve normally on their own.

Venezuela is a good example of what happens when we take an infant democracy and make it a part of corporate America to feed our interests. Now look at what that coconut is doing with our oil rigs. Thats right, OURS. We built those rigs.

We should not be touching these politics with a ten foot pole. This is one of the only times America should do nothing except issue sanctions to keep things humane.

Because we should always think about religion when we decide whether to make foreign policy judgements.

;)

[TheEschaton]

Leftist dictator? Until this coup, barely anybody even thought Zalaya was moderately leftist.

So, he put a referendum on 5 months before an election, instead of 6? This is coup-worthy? Referendums are not per se banned, it's an arbitrary rule at best (why 6 months? Why not 3 months?) and it still stands that the Honduras Supreme Court is ridiculously corrupt, and that the Congress is run by business elites.

-TheE-

[Kembal]

Leftist dictator? Until this coup, barely anybody even thought Zalaya was moderately leftist.

So, he put a referendum on 5 months before an election, instead of 6? This is coup-worthy? Referendums are not per se banned, it's an arbitrary rule at best (why 6 months? Why not 3 months?) and it still stands that the Honduras Supreme Court is ridiculously corrupt, and that the Congress is run by business elites.

-TheE-

Doesn't matter, the law is the law. The court and Congress are out of line for ordering and going along with the coup, respectively, and Zelaya is out of line for trying to hold a referendum in violation of their constitution. (BTW, it occurs to me that probably the best reason for the referendum ban is exactly the current situation: to prevent a president from getting rid of the term limit so he could run again for office)

There's certainly no defense for Zelaya's actions, and only a fig leaf of a defense for the court, Congress, and the military's actions there.

[TheEschaton]

The law is not the law when unjustly made. I'm pretty sure Germany circa the 30s made that clear.

Oh, and getting rid of the term limit one month earlier would have been fine, by your logic? Not to mention, the referendum was whether they should CHANGE term limits, not abolish them. BTW, the term limit in Honduras right now: one term. I'd want to change that too.

-TheE-

[Mabus]

and it still stands that the Honduras Supreme Court is ridiculously corrupt, and that the Congress is run by business elites.
Zelaya is known to be corrupt, involved in selling the cocaine of Venezuela.

"Every night, three or four Venezuelan-registered planes land without the permission of appropriate authorities and bring thousands of pounds ... and packages of money that are the fruit of drug trafficking. We have proof of all of this. Neighboring governments have it. The DEA has it."
-Honduran Foreign Minister Enrique Ortez - CNN En Espanol

[TheEschaton]

Oddly enough, Enrique Ortez, also corrupt.

[Mabus]

The law is not the law when unjustly made. I'm pretty sure Germany circa the 30s made that clear.
Godwin's law... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law)

Oh, and getting rid of the term limit one month earlier would have been fine, by your logic? Not to mention, the referendum was whether they should CHANGE term limits, not abolish them. BTW, the term limit in Honduras right now: one term. I'd want to change that too.
They have good reasons to fear dictatorships, and the hard limit on one term was put in their Constitution in 1982 for those reasons.

Now the translation is iffy, but....
Part of Article III of the Honduran Constitution states:
(el pueblo tiene derecho a recurrir a la insurrección en defensa del orden constitucional.
"the people have the right to resort to insurrection in defense of constitutional order."

And Article IV states:
(La alternabilidad en el ejercicio de la Presidencia de la República es obligatoria)
Alternation in the exercise (practice?) of the presidency of the Republic is required.

(La infracción de esta norma constituye delito de traición a la Patria.)
Violation of this rule constitutes the crime of treason.

That would seem to make the attempt of changing the term limit (which is a Constitutional matter) by popular referendum (instead of a Constitutional Assembly) a crime of treason, which invalidates the presidency; allowing the people (in this case their Courts, their Representatives and their Military) to no longer recognize the person committing the infraction as a valid political leader.

I could not find any information dealing with a system similar to our impeachment system in their Constitution. None may exist, in which case the right to rise up and toss out the treasonous would have to take over.

;)

[Mabus]

Oddly enough, Enrique Ortez, also corrupt.
Who appointed him? Manuel Zelaya?

[Back]

I asked our chef about this, he's Honduran, and this is what he told me...

The rich elite of Honduras, whom also own American companies, have incredible sway over the government. Zelaya, a democratically elected president, has been trying to bring the balance of power back from them to himself.

[Mabus]

I asked our chef about this, he's Honduran, and this is what he told me...

The rich elite of Honduras, whom also own American companies, have incredible sway over the government. Zelaya, a democratically elected president, has been trying to bring the balance of power back from them to himself.
I asked a guy in front of Home Depot about this, and this is what he told me....
:whocares:

[Latrinsorm]

Yeah Back, everyone knows the best view is from within the ivory tower, preferably sitting on a cushioned chair with a smoking jacket on.

[TheEschaton]

Again, oddly enough, our country has similar wording in its documents, saying that when oppressed, a people have a sacred duty to rise up and throw off tyranny. Nevertheless, it would have been wrong for us to use the military to depose G.W., and we wait patiently for a better candidate to come along.

And the whole point IS that Honduras has impeachment proceedings, the Congress was about to commence them, when they decided, "Eh, let's have a coup instead."


-TheE-

[Kembal]

The law is not the law when unjustly made. I'm pretty sure Germany circa the 30s made that clear.

Oh, and getting rid of the term limit one month earlier would have been fine, by your logic? Not to mention, the referendum was whether they should CHANGE term limits, not abolish them. BTW, the term limit in Honduras right now: one term. I'd want to change that too.

-TheE-

As Mabus pointed out, with the history of dictatorships in Latin America, a hard one term limit may be intended to prevent that from happening. In any case, I fail to see something unjust about a ban on constitutional referendums six months before a national election.

[Tea & Strumpets]

Again, oddly enough, our country has similar wording in its documents, saying that when oppressed, a people have a sacred duty to rise up and throw off tyranny. Nevertheless, it would have been wrong for us to use the military to depose G.W., and we wait patiently for a better candidate to come along.

-TheE-

You have to admit, it's pretty funny that you used this analogy.

[Back]

I asked a guy in front of Home Depot about this, and this is what he told me....
:whocares:

I see the italics. But somehow this offends me. Probably because I am so into work right now... the man from Honduras, which you are not from nor am I, gave me his opinion. I have none because I am not Honduran. I’m surprised you think you know so much. Are you Honduran?

Our chef, who came here from Honduras made his way to sous chef at a very well established DC fine dining restaurant and is now our very talented executive chef. I guess the issue I have with your italics is not every South American immigrant's opinion can be dismissed with italics in some humorous fashion like you know better than they do without you having walked a mile in their shoes.

But you were being flippant, Mabus, as you can be.

[Parkbandit]

Again, oddly enough, our country has similar wording in its documents, saying that when oppressed, a people have a sacred duty to rise up and throw off tyranny. Nevertheless, it would have been wrong for us to use the military to depose G.W., and we wait patiently for a better candidate to come along.

:rofl:

Is that seriously your best comparison? GW was a tyrant, but we just waited for him to leave?

[Parkbandit]

I see the italics. But somehow this offends me. Probably because I am so into work right now... the man from Honduras, which you are not from nor am I, gave me his opinion. I have none because I am not Honduran. I’m surprised you think you know so much. Are you Honduran?

Our chef, who came here from Honduras made his way to sous chef at a very well established DC fine dining restaurant and is now our very talented executive chef. I guess the issue I have with your italics is not every South American immigrant's opinion can be dismissed with italics in some humorous fashion like you know better than they do without you having walked a mile in their shoes.

But you were being flippant, Mabus, as you can be.

You do realize that an opinion, regardless of the place of birth, is still an opinion, right? BFD he used to live in Honduras.. that doesn't make him anymore informed than anyone else. Look at you for instance.. if someone from Honduras asked you for an opinion about politics in the US.. would that somehow make it more informed or more correct? Very unlikely.

[Mabus]

Are you Honduran?

Ich bin ein Honduran!

Zelaya plane circles airport -BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8135471.stm)

[Back]

You do realize that an opinion, regardless of the place of birth, is still an opinion, right? BFD he used to live in Honduras.. that doesn't make him anymore informed than anyone else. Look at you for instance.. if someone from Honduras asked you for an opinion about politics in the US.. would that somehow make it more informed or more correct? Very unlikely.

I would definitely take someone's opinion of the country they lived in over someone who did not live in that country. To do otherwise seems ignorant... unless you are seeking to validate your own opinion.

[Parkbandit]

I would definitely take someone's opinion of the country they lived in over someone who did not live in that country. To do otherwise seems ignorant... unless you are seeking to validate your own opinion.

Ignorant would be to weigh someone's opinion JUST because they are from the country you are seeking an opinion on. I used you as a perfect example of how stupid that would be.. but clearly you didn't understand.

Likewise.. I'm certain I could find someone who lived in Honduras at one point in their life to say the complete opposite of what your chef friend said... so which one is more likely to be closer to the truth?

[Back]

Ignorant would be to weigh someone's opinion JUST because they are from the country you are seeking an opinion on. I used you as a perfect example of how stupid that would be.. but clearly you didn't understand.

Likewise.. I'm certain I could find someone who lived in Honduras at one point in their life to say the complete opposite of what your chef friend said... so which one is more likely to be closer to the truth?

Both and not yours. Unless you feel a Russian can give a more accurate view of American politics than any American?

[Parkbandit]

Both and not yours. Unless you feel a Russian can give a more accurate view of American politics than any American?

I believe there are MANY Russians that can give me a more accurate view of American politics than you can.

Your place of residence doesn't give you some automatic knowledge.

[Gan]

The Supreme Court did do that, though I have no idea if its actually legal for the judicial branch in Honduras to issue orders to the armed forces. (certainly can't happen here)

What should've happened is that Congress should have impeached/removed him through whatever process they have, inaugurate his successor, and then if he refused to leave, have him arrested. (preferably by law enforcement, not by the military)

They flipped the order of actions, and that's what's troubling about it. For example, instead of doing the formal impeachement process of Clinton in 98 and going through a trial, what if Congress just told the military to arrest him and throw him out of the country, and then did the impeachment and removal later? That'd be in violation of the Constitution here, and I imagine it's in violation of the constitution there as well.

Probably the best post in the thread thus far. Too bad the thought above is yet to be answered.

And the question I pose to those supporting the 'rule of law' in Honduras - do you feel the same way in supporting the 'rule of law' in Iran right now, with specific regard to their election issues?

[TheEschaton]

PB is right, Back. As far as I can tell, he's been living here his whole life (approx. 247835 years), and has no understanding of politics at all.

And you have to admit, the story from the Honduran sous chef is so cliche. Many people live in a state of total obliviousness, the vast majority live without a larger view of the bigger picture.

-TheE-

[Parkbandit]

PB is right, Back.

-TheE-

Thanks Captain Obvious.