After the fascist coup in Honduras, can anyone STILL defend the School of the Americas?

[Ken Burch]

Since our military trained those Honduran fascists, can we now all agree that the School should be closed forever?

It's time for us to stop training reactionary killers.

"bipartisanship" and "looking tough" are never worth the loss of innocent lives.

[billyoc]

1. The school that launched a hundred Abu Ghraibs.

[nosmokes]

2. Why is it seemingly impossible to rein in all these intelligence and special op

forces and get them working w/in the law? torture? military coups? This is not the way American foreign policy is supposed to be implemented.

[Colobo]

3. Who says the US has something to do with this?

[billyoc]

4. The coup leader is an SoA grad.

[Colobo]

5. Still, it was a decision of the Supreme Court, the Congress and the military of Honduras.

Micheletti, the new president, even belongs to Zelaya's party. His own people kicked the guy out.

[Ken Burch]

7. The coup was by people who want Honduras to be right-wing forever.

It's only antidemocratic reactionaries who wanted Zelaya overthrown. And they couldn't have done it without the Army.

P.S., no Supreme Court anywhere in the world has the right to overthrow a democratic government.

[Colobo]

10. I guess we disagree on this one.

I've always been a bit to the right when it comes to Latin American politics (my own country included). Not a fan of coups and violence, but very wary of the left down there.

[Ken Burch]

13. Why? It's only been left-wing governments in Latin America that ever treated the poor as humans

And only left-wing Latin American governments that are antiracist(Cuba will go back to straight Jim Crow if capitalists take it over again, since there's no such thing as a non-racist Cuban exile).

President Obama would never approve of your attitude on this.

[boppers]

15. Over-ruling term limits in the constitution?

Uhm, I don't think I'm following you.

Zelaya wanted to bypass their national constitution, their congress said no, their Supreme Court said no, Zelaya kept going, the military said no, Zalaya started sacking generals, their military arrested him.

It's messy.

http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/breaking-news-world/honduras-president-exiled-new-leader-orders-curfew-20090629-d1vx.html

[Colobo]

17. For some, as long as the left does it, it's all good.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

137. And for other as long as the Latin American right does it it's all good too. Go figure. nt

[Ken Burch]

19. Term limits have only benefited the right. Everywhere.

Constant turnover in elective office always puts the poor and the powerless and the workers at a disadvantage.

Term limits always mean that the right-wing corporate opponents of the people have the advantage, because they always have more experience and institutional memory. It's because of term limits on committee chairs that you had right-wing lobbyists writing legislation for Newt's Congress.

Term limits have never had positive or progressive consequences anywhere.

And why shouldn't a civilian president be able to sack generals. All Latin American generals are bloodsoaked fascists anyway(other than Costa Rica's-oh, wait a minute, Costa Rica doesn't HAVE generals, even though Reagan tried to force them to).

No coup can ever be good for the people.

It's disgusting that you're defending fascism.

[Colobo]

21. I'm sure Cubans wish they had term limits.

[Ken Burch]

23. Nobody who chose to stay in Cuba wants the Miami exiles running the place again.

The exiles are the ones who CAUSED the Revolution. Cuba can never benefit from capitalism. Democracy, yes, but not capitalism. And nothing good can come from the end of racial equality, which is also what Miami exiles want.

[Colobo]

26. Ok... I guess we stand on different sides when it comes to Latin American politics

which is cool, but we will never agree on this one. My ideal of Latin American leftist goverments is embodied today in Chile, Argentina, Uruguay... and I prefer Alvaro Uribe's Colombia to Chavez's Venezuela any single day of the week.

[Ken Burch]

29. If you back Uribe, a man who has slaughtered tens of thousands of poor people

That tells me right there you have no progressive views.

BTW, Chile, Argentina and Uruguay all OPPOSE the coup.

[Colobo]

34. I know they oppose the coup, and that's fine with me.

Still, they are CAPITALIST countries that have implemented progressive policies to create social justice. Also, if you consider that in order to be progressive I need to be a socialist or a communist, then I will never be a progressive to you.

And yes, I do back Uribe.

[provis99]

79. I bet you're just wild about Batista and Galtieri, too.

[Colobo]

95. No.

[Hannah Bell]

105. venezuela: also capitalist.

[mudplanet]

126. Yikes! That's a strange thing to say.

The Colombian government has a long history of corruption and being supportive of mass murderers. Chavez's government, while far from perfect, has very little history of this type of violence, and has, in fact, proven itself to waaaaay tolerant of opposition from the right. No stories of systematic torture and mass murder coming from Venezuela under Chavez. Plenty of credible stories about government involvement with political murders (planned, systematic campaigns of political murders) under the Uribe government.

I guess if your idea of a good government is one which allies itself with business interests to systematically torture and murder citizens who work to improve working conditions for the poor, and that, despite massive (MASSIVE) infusions of military and monetary aid from the US, still feels its a good idea to hire out armies of paid assassins to terrorize the poor population, then you're right to state a preference for Colombia's government.

[troubledamerican]

166. Holy crap -- Uribe has Death Squads & mass graves. Chavez has ZERO.

Support for Uribe? Proof of a Neocon troll.

[boppers]

24. HUH?

So, Bush should have been on the last presidential Ballot, and complained about a 'coup' if the Supreme Court and US congress, and US military, all disagreed with him?

Because that would have benefited the poor?

That doesn't exactly make sense.

[Ken Burch]

27. You can't compare Bush losing a third term with what was done to Zelaya

And it's never acceptable for the military to have a say in who should be president. The military never intervenes in it's country's domestic politics for positive or honorable people. They just want to kill the poor.

There is no progressive pro-coup position.

If the coup stands, Honduras will be right-wing forever. Why would you want that?

Term limits are always right-wing.

BTW, you do realize that it was Republicans who imposed our country's presidential term limits, don't you? They did it to punish the poor and the workers for giving FDR four terms. There was never any honorable justification for term limits. The poor don't gain from them.

[boppers]

36. Not just Bush losing a third term.

It's Bush refusing to accept election results until the constitution was re-written, or amended, until he was eligible for a third term, and him ordering the US military to run elections supporting a third term.

The poor *do* gain from term limits, when there are undemocratic, power hungry, nutjobs permanently in power, in both capitalist, and socialist, states. It's pretty much a way of preventing life-long dictators.

How many terms are you arguing Reagan should have had? 3? 5?

edit: typo

[Ken Burch]

38. The U.S. term limits were imposed by Republicans

They were meant to make sure we never had another FDR.

We've been permanently pushed to the right as a result.

And Zelaya wasn't a nutjob or undemocratic.

He was having a referendum. How is THAT undemocratic? It's undemocratic to let the people decide this?

Now that the coup's in place, the right-wing status quo will be locked in place in Honduras forever. How can you be good with that?

Forced turnover in office means there's no instutitional memory, which means the right always has the upper hand. It means politics like Newt Gingrich gave us. It would've meant Ron Dellums being forced out of Congress decades earlier, which would only have benefited the rich. Term limits are never good for the people. That's why Republicans like them.

How can you defend anything Newt Gingrich would do?

[boppers]

44. What the heck?

Eisenhower was the first US president capped by term limits, Washington and Jefferson both supported two term maximums, as did Madison and Monroe, and since the 22nd Amendment was put into place, it put a cap on the following folks running for a third term: Dwight D. Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

Thus, it's had more of a limit on right-wing power than left-wing power.

Populist elections to.... suspend elections? Uh, you really need me to explain why that isn't democratic?

[Ken Burch]

49. EIsenhower was the first affected, but the limits were imposed to punish the poor and the workers

for defying the rich by electing FDR four times. Our political spectrum has been forced to the right of the New Deal ever since.

Term limits have never had progressive consequences. Frequent turnover in office is only good for right-wingers. It never helps the people.

[boppers]

66. You keep saying that.

What's your evidence?

[Ken Burch]

72. Our own country's politics since 1952.

Corporate power's been unchallenged the whole time.

[noiretextatique]

151. "where's your evidence?"

:rofl: :wtf: :cry: how can anyone ask that after 8 years of bush and 29+ years of right-wing nuttery? tragic.

[ButterflyBlood]

197. Correlation does not always imply causation

You need to actually explain how term limits have resulted in hideously right wing policies in the US. Considering the only Democratic President blocked from another term because of them was the most conservative in a century that's a bit of a tough case to make.

[anigbrowl]

178. Personally, I'm quite glad W. couldn't run for a 3rd term.

He'd probably have lost, but then I thought he was going to lose in 2004 too.

[mudplanet]

216. He did lose in 2004

Republicans complaining about a lack of transparency and fairness in election processes is more than a little disingenuous.

[Hannah Bell]

97. "wanted to bypass their national constitution"

= wanted to hold a referendum on term limits.


orwell much?

[Abq_Sarah]

142. Their constitution

Prohibits eliminating term limits.

[Abq_Sarah]

141. I believe the military

Is tasked with upholding their constitution, sort of like Turkey. Theoretically, it's supposed to provide a more stable government and prevent politicians from seizing power they do not possess.

[Hippo_Tron]

184. Regardless of Zelaya's actions, military coups are illegal and inappropriate

I agree with President Obama on this one. If Zalaya needed to be removed from office it should have been done through another channel besides the military. Having the military take over a civilian government sets a horrible precedent.

Al Gore won the 2000 election and should have been inaugurated. But under no circumstances would I have wanted the military to intervene to make that happen.

[SuperTrouper]

42. Zelaya wanted to abolish the Congress and the Supreme Court, that was his intention

and the Honduran people did not want him. You see no incidents on Youtube, the people are happy to be rid of Zelaya. Even his own Liberal party denounced him and voted unanimously with the national Party and other left-leaning parties to depose him.

[Hannah Bell]

99. his "intention," was it? good one. hey, it's obama's "intention" to

give all the money to the banksters & bankrupt the rest of us.

i think we need to send the military in to remove him.

crap, this is the democratic party?

could have fooled me.

smells like weimar.

[Ken Burch]

170. Er, no. He didn't want to do all that.

And a constitutional convention would be a democratic, grassroots process. Unlike Congressional elections, which are always biased towards the rich.

[Raine1967]

50. 2000. eom.

[Ken Burch]

53. The fact that they did it didn't mean they had the right to do it.

n/t.

[SuperTrouper]

56. It is written in the Honduran constitution, they have to follow it just like we have to

follow here the American Constitution. (Zelaya wanted to be the new Bush)

[Ken Burch]

59. I was talking about the 2000 situation.

And a country can't be considered a democracy if the military has the right to intervene in politics.

All Zelaya was doing was holding a referendum. This wasn't an evil act.

You're defending a military intervention against allowing the people to have a say in their government.

How can you do that, ever?

[SuperTrouper]

67. In 1998 Honduras suffered greatly with Hurricane Mitch and all the world donated food and money

to help Honduras. President Flores was unable to control the corruption and all the food and money went to corrupt government officials, so in 2002 Maduro took power (right-center President under the National Party) and he committed atrocities against the gangs and peasants. After he left power Zelaya took over promising reforms and modernization for the country. Unfortunately, something happened to him and he did not care about budgets, etc. He still has not proposed a budget for 2009...so no money and nothing happening in Honduras. Also the ballots for his "consult" today were all printed in Venezuela and the machines brought from Venezuela too. I think that the OAS and the UN are right to criticize a change which appears unconstitutional but they need to familiarize themselves with Zelaya's policies. Even the Carter Center is slowing down on the rhetoric because they are beginning to find out about Zelaya's misadventures

[Ken Burch]

73. Why does it matter if the ballots were printed in Venezuela?

They're both Spanish-speaking countries. It's not like the people couldn't understand the ballots.

All military interventions in politics bring nothing but evil. There has never been, and never can be, an honorable coup.

[SuperTrouper]

81. Because the urns were already stuffed prior to the voting, just like in Iran

[Ken Burch]

183. You don't know that. That's simply propaganda from the Honduran upper class

n/t.

[Statistical]

149. Technically the US military takes an oath to defend the constitution...

not defend Washington, or the 2 party system.

IF Bush tried to seek a 3rd term, the Supreme Court ruled he couldn't and he still refused to step down the US military would be obligated to act (if all other measures failed).

I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

Now do I think it is every likely in the US that situation gets that far out of hand? No.
Is it a guarantee the military would act correct? No.

Is it completely impossible for a democracy to use military power to restore the rule of law? Yes.

[Common Sense Party]

153. Constitution? We don't need no steeenkin' Constitution!!!

[Ken Burch]

171. Why are you so fixated on the sacredness of the Honduran Constitition

It's a right-wing document biased towards the white property-owning minority. There's no good reason for any non-reactionary to defend a constitution like that.

[Common Sense Party]

177. Do you defend the U.S. Constitution?

It has also been called by some a right-wing document biased towards the white property-owning minority.

I happen to like separation of powers.

[Ken Burch]

180. I don't accept that our Constitution can't be changed

And I wouldn't support the automatic removal from office of someone who wanted to change it.

We do need, for example, to get rid of the Electoral College and let the American people actually ELECT our own president. There's no longer any good reason to keep anything in the Constitution that is(as the EC is)a vestige of the Compromise of 1787, a compromise designed solely to preserve slavery.

I believe in a living Constitution, and also that separation of powers should not mean that an elite gets to block the will of the people. There's nothing honorable in the aspects of the Honduran Constitution that the golpistas are claiming to be defending.

That constitution gives the military a veto in politics.

[subsuelo]

181. The big thing being overlooked in all this

is that the vote that was to occur on Sunday in Honduras, was merely a poll to gauge public opinion over the idea of changing the country's constitution. Non-binding, just a public opinion poll basically.

Why some have such a huge problem with gathering public opinion on the matter, is the question we should be asking.

[Ken Burch]

182. Good question. Why are the coup supporters here and elsewhere acting as if this referendum

was the equivalent of Soviet tanks rolling into Prague or something?

[Common Sense Party]

190. Laws are pesky things, aren't they?

Wiki: The National Congress passed a law forbidding holding referenda less than 180 days before the next general election; as the next elections are set for 29 November 2009, this invalidates the referendum bid. http://lta.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idLTASIE55N06G20090624

Congress passed the law and the Supreme Court backed it. That's what separation of powers does.

[EFerrari]

226. Their Supreme court is appointed by the Congress.

You're celebrating a separation that doesn't exist.

[subsuelo]

228. it wasn't a referendum. n/t

[EFerrari]

225. You do realize that the Reagan administration produced the Honduran

constitution. It's not the Holy Grail.

[billyoc]

11. Strange how every country on earth says he must be reinstalled.

[Colobo]

12. Whatever is best for Honduras I will support.

[Ken Burch]

14. How can a fascist coup EVER be "what's best for Honduras"?

You do realize there's going to be torture and mass executions, don't you?

[Colobo]

16. I hope those don't happen and the restoration of the order is quick and peaceful.

The greatest crimes against humanity in Lat. Am. have been committed by right wing dictatorships, so that's a real concern. Still, the fact that the president of the Congress has been declared temporary president until January of next year gives me hope that this process is truly temporary.

[Ken Burch]

You sound like LBJ bragging about how the Dominican Republic and South Vietnam were

"moving towards elections".

There is NEVER an acceptable military coup.

[boppers]

20. Which "fascist coup", though?

Zalaya's, or the rest of the government's?

[Ken Burch]

22. Zelaya was democratizing Honduras

The existing constitution was written to force Honduras to be capitalist, Spanish-descent supremacist, and right-wing forever.

Why would any decent human being defend a right-wing constitution?

[Colobo]

28. Capitalism is not the problem, and racism in Lat. Am. goes way beyond politics.

If you actually think Fidel eliminated racism in Cuba, I got a bridge to sell you in Little Havana.

[Ken Burch]

31. He dramatically reduced it.

And you know there are no progressives or antiracists in Little Havana. No one who wants the market back in Cuba has humane values.

[stevenleser]

188. You do understand that this is Democratic Underground, not Socialist Underground, right?

I've read your comments to this OP & others and it is clear that you are not a proponent of the Democratic Party and its candidates. I think you are not only to the left of the Democratic Party, I think you are to left of the Green Party. I have no problem with the right of people who want to believe what they want to believe, but why come to DU and argue with Democrats about being Democrats? I might as well go to a website geared towards people who share your views and argue that most things that happens in politics are unrelated to class struggle.

[subsuelo]

193. So any opinion expressed beyond the Democratic Party line is unwelcome?

[stevenleser]

211. I never implied that. In my case, it is unwelcome, but I cannot speak for anyone else or the mods

I'm personally not interested in debating anyone that considerably further left or right here. If I want that, I can go other places.

[Ken Burch]

224. So basically, you can't handle debating anyone you actually disagree with.

You are, I think, misunderstanding the concept of "debate".

BTW, are you arguing that closing the School of the Americas is an unthinkable idea for members of the Democratic Party? If so, why?

Finally, as to a point in your earlier post, after the bank collapse, how can you deny that class struggle is more important than anything else in politics?

[Ken Burch]

223. It's not your place to say who is and is not welcome in the Democratic Party

I'm to your left, but so are a lot of Democrats. And there's no real reason why the party should limit itself to YOUR place on the spectrum.

A stronger left is makes a stronger Democratic Party. The Thirties proved that.

[boppers]

33. Was he trying to hold a democratic, constitutional convention?

I missed that part of the story, then, looking into it, it was more than just term limits... he wanted to not only hold a convention, but also suspend the election results of his successor, until the constitution was finished.

[Ken Burch]

35. You can't honestly believe a military coup can be progressive or positive.

No one in any right-wing Latin American army ever fought against racism.

Face it, this coup has to end up like Chile in '73. No military takeover can be different than that.

You've joined the right if you back the coup.

[boppers]

37. Uh, the military was backed by congress.

And the courts. Congress already put in a new president, and the military stepped back.

I'm not sure why you're pro-dictator, with leaders unrestrained by the military, congress/parliament, or the courts.

[Ken Burch]

39. The Chilean military was backed by the Chilean congress in '73

Did that make THAT event ok with you?

There has never been a case where the military did the people any good by "restraining" an elected leader.

Zelaya was on the side of the people and the Honduran Congress is against the people. Can't you see that?

The military is always negative when it intervenes in politics.

[boppers]

64. The military then dissolved Congress, in Chile

That's where it went south. The military assumed power in Chile, in Honduras, they enforced it. (So far...)

Totally different reasons, totally different outcomes.

[Ken Burch]

71. In both cases, the Congress in those countries opposed democracy and backed fascism

The blood of the Chilean people is on that Congress' hands.

There can NEVER be an honorable role for the military in politics. Anywhere.

If civilians aren't in charge of the government, the country cannot be considered free. Ever.

[boppers]

75. Would you say that includes:

Using the military to force illegal elections?

[Ken Burch]

77. The referendum Zelaya wanted wasn't illegal.

It's just that the rich didn't want it and the military(which only fights for the rich and hates the people and black Hondurans)served the rich.

The streets of Tegucigalpa are going to be filled with blood. This can't be any different than Chile in '73. All Latin American generals live to kill.

[boppers]

84. Their courts found it illegal.

Your counterclaim that the referendum was legal is based on....?

[kingofkings]

111. The Supreme Court found the referendum illegal

yet Zelaya went ahead with it.

[Ken Burch]

115. Our Supreme Court once ruled that African Americans weren't hiuman beings

"The Supreme Court says" doesn't always make it right.

[kingofkings]

118. And Presidents have ruled that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction

and Presidents have done atrocious things all over the world.
It's a matter of striking the right balance.

[Ken Burch]

76. You can't be a progressive and trust the military.

Remember what happened in Dallas.

[boppers]

82. Sorry, I'm over 30. Am I not to be trusted?

So, I'll bite: what happened in Dallas?

[Ken Burch]

85. I. Can't. Believe. You. Asked. That.

[boppers]

89. What the heck does that have to do with the military?

[Common Sense Party]

192. Nothing.

I'm still trying to figure out how and why hatred of our armed forces is somehow a progressive value.

[kingofkings]

119. But congress voted to oust the President, and congress is not the military

Are we not progressives if we trust congress AND the supreme court?

[Ken Burch]

172. the convention would've been democratic.

Nothing could've happened in it that would be worse than having the army teargassing people in the streets of Tegucigalpa(and doing God knows what else to the people it's arrested down in the torture chambers).

This is not an honorable army. No "anticommunist" Latin American army is. The SoA made sure of that.

[SuperTrouper]

48. You are wrong, since 1982, nearly all Presidents have been Liberal, left-leaning

Presidents: Suazo, Azcona, Reina, Flores, and Zelaya. The only ones that have been center-right were Callejans and Maduro. So you are wrong, and the Constitution is not right wing, it is a left-wing document written to protect the country from right-wing military dictatorships like Carias Andino, Lopez Arellano, Melgar Castro and Paz Garcia, I wish you could take the time to read a little bit about Honduras and its people before coming here to make blanket statements without foundation.

[Ken Burch]

51. You're the one who's defending the military, when the military only fights for the rich.

n/t.

[SuperTrouper]

55. Wrong again, I am not defending the military. Zelaya was trying to fire General Romeo Vasquez

Velazquez for refusing to follow his illegal order to put voting booths which were deemd illegal by the Honduran Supreme Court and the Honduran Tribunal of Elections. Zelaya fired him and the Honduran Supreme Court ordered the President to reinstate Vasquez Velazquez. Zelkaya told the Honduras SUpreme Court to f*ck itself and that he ewas the sole power in the country and then the National COngress and the Hondu SUpremes ordered the Military to depose the President as per articles of the Honduras Constitution, it was not a coup d'etat. The military followed orders and now put themselves under the new President Micheletti. The Honduran people were seen in the streets applauding the Army

[Ken Burch]

57. In a democracy, the civilian leadership must ALWAYS have power over the military

It stops being a democracy if the military gets a veto.

No military coup can ever be progressive or good for the people.

And we can assume that, being imposed by the military, Micheletti's agenda will be purely right wing. We can also assume that the poor will be rounded up and killed.

And even you would have to agree that the kidnappings of ambassadors automatically delegitamize a regime.

[SuperTrouper]

69. Yes but the civilian President should not be above the law. The military had no veto, they were

ordered by the Judicial and the legislative bodies to rein in a runaway President that was causing social, economic and political chaos in Honduras, that's all.

[Ken Burch]

117. A coup is a veto.

People are being killed in Honduras tonight.

[mudplanet]

217. a runaway President that was causing social, economic and political chaos in Honduras

For the oligarchy in the Deep South, desegregation and the Voting Rights Act meant social, economic, and political chaos (I don't know why they did that, we always treated our Negros well (actual quote from my friend's mother)).

For the oligarchy in South Africa, ending Apartheid equaled causing social, economic, and political chaos.

For the oligarchy in Nicaragua, providing social services to the poor and giving them a vote meant social, economic, and political chaos.

For the oligarchy in El Salvador, allowing popular participation in governing the country meant social, economic, and political chaos (and the oligarchy, after they had murdered tens of thousands of defenseless civilians, signed a peace accord and the "communists," contrary to what the right had been predicting, participated peacefully in the democratic process, and continue to do so. The real issue in all of these examples is the oligarchy's privilege - why have a democracy when it's so much easier and profitable to rule by the gun).

For the oligarchy in Chile, for the oligarchy in Argentina, for the oligarchy in Venezuela, for the oligarchy in Bolivia, for the oligarchy in Ecuador, change that involves instituting a real, democratically representative form of government has meant social, economic, and political chaos.

[troubledamerican]

157. In a democracy, there is no "ordering the military to depose" anyone. Impeachment is the process.

So yes, you are anti-democracy, and pro-military dictatorship. Your defense of the Honduran coup speaks volumes.

Stating that "people were in the streets applauding the Army" is propaganda. There are also crowds protesting.

Your words are blazingly fascist. There's no pretense at all of democratic process in your defense of the coup.

Amazing, but not surprising.

[mudplanet]

130. all presidents have been liberal since 1982??

I'm unclear here. If the presidents in Honduras were liberal and left leaning, then why did they allow an army of anti-democratic murderers called the contras to operate with impunity on Honduran soil for so long? I don't know - it just seems like a strange way for a liberal, left-leaning president to act.

Come on, everyone (excepting possibly you) reading this site knows that Honduras has been (at least since the fall of Somoza) basically a major US army base and a tool for what the CIA likes to call "supporting decomocrcy in Latin America" but which really means making sure that populist and democratic movements don't take hold in little countries that aren't supposed to talk back.

This "conversation" reminds me of one I had with a wealthy Guatemalan doctor in the early 90's in which he denied, repeatedly, that there was any government sponsored violence going on in his country. I think he may have really believed himself. Or the mail exchange I had with the US senator's aid in the 80's where, after I'd written numerous times to protest the US support for the El Salvadoran Government, pointing out some of the numerous atrocities that that government had committed, they continued to write to me to deny any US involvement in these atrocities (only in that case the creeps actually knew they were lying, they just apparently felt it was ok to lie, to torture, and to murder lots and lots of unarmed civilians as long as, in the "big picture," it was in the service of "freedom.")

[troubledamerican]

158. Telltale observation you make

This "conversation" reminds you of one you had with a wealthy Guatemalan doctor... Bingo.

Like I wrote earlier up the thread, I smell a wealthy South American (or Central American) right-winger somewhere behind the masks of several DUers here.

[Abq_Sarah]

144. You call this a fascist coup

Why is that?

Is it fascist for Honduras to follow their own laws?

You and I may not agree with their constitution but removing the President for violating it is, apparently, completely legal and was done to prevent a Zelaya coup. These guys are elected Presidents, not dictators and they need to follow the laws that govern their nations. If they choose to overthrow and discard their system of government, they need to be damned sure they have enough support. It does not appear Zelaya had the level of support he needed unless he was planning on Venezuela riding to his rescue and imposing a new form of government.

What troubles me is the support Zelaya is receiving from other "world leaders". Do they also believe a President should have the right to nullify their nation's laws?

[troubledamerican]

159. President Obama disagrees with you. He states the coup is "NOT legal".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3945201

[Abq_Sarah]

205. I don't care

I have often thought the President was ill served by many of his advisers and this is no different. Zelaya's actions were clearly illegal under Honduran law and although I personally believe the Hondurans should be able to decide for themselves if they want to retain Presidential term limits, their constitution says otherwise. I am also troubled by the section of their constitution that allows for the removal of citizenship for anyone who "incites" the people to remove the term limit but that is their law and it will take an "illegal coup" to get rid of it. This one just didn't work. People will remember this though and perhaps next time will be different. What bothers me the most about this is the world leaders who are aghast at the thoughts of strict limits on executive power with harsh consequences for those who violate the laws they swear to protect. I can imagine they are horrified at the thought of being removed from their respective countries in the middle of the night in their PJs.

[Common Sense Party]

191. Prove to us that this is a "fascist coup."

Your opinion does not constitute proof.

[Ken Burch]

208. A curfew in place. International media blacked out. Teargassing in the streets

Looks like a duck, goosesteps like a duck, it's a reich.

[Common Sense Party]

220. Funny, Telemundo must not have gotten the memo.

They're still reporting. A reich is a stretch. I'll wait until the ovens are fired up before I'll call this a reich. Your duck ain't quacking just yet.

[Ken Burch]

221. They're reporting FROM Honduras. You can't watch them IN Honduras

n/t.

[Common Sense Party]

179. Why are we "meddling" in Honduras' electoral affairs, and allowing Iran

to do whatever they wish? President Obama didn't waste any time opining on the crisis in Tegucigalpa, but he isn't quite as forceful when it comes to Tehran.

[Ken Burch]

6. I'm not attacking Obama, I'm attacking the U.S. foreign policy heritage

Obama can only succeed as president if he breaks with all of it.

We should never again take the side of the rich against the poor. Anywhere. It that so hard to understand?

And "national interests" are always only corporate interests.

[Colobo]

8. The "rich" against the "poor" is a simplification of the Latin American problem...

[Ken Burch]

9. It's never been about anything else but class.

Other than the split between Mestizos/Indios and pure-blooded Spanish descent people on the other(which is also an exclusively rich v. poor split, since pure blood Spanish descent Latin Americans are always rich.)
Why pretend otherwise?

There's no centrism in Latin America, no "nuance" no "win-win situations". And no poor person in all of Honduras backs the coup. It's only the rich that are against Zelaya.

Why are you being an apologist for the death of Honduran democracy?

[nealmhughes]

25. That is not the case of Costa Rica at all. There are/were a lot of poor Spanish descent

people there. Just like West Virginia, they did not need a minority to oppress. But we see Evo and Hugo singled out for derisive taunts about their race that would not stand in Cuba or Mexico. Very strange dynamics there. I fail to see how the people of Ecuador could not be proud of having an indigeno president. But obviously a great number do. But then again, it seems that enough money has a habit of "whitening" anyone in the world.

[Colobo]

30. Race in Lat. Am. trascends the left wing/right wing battle.

It's so complex...

[Ken Burch]

32. There has never been a right-wing government anywhere in Latin America that opposed racism

And no rich Latin Americans oppose it either. Racism is tied to exploitation and can never be reduced by giving corporations more power.

[troubledamerican]

160. Deafening crickets... because Ken is right. No LATAM right-wingers ever oppose racism

It's all about class warfare.

"There IS class warfare. And my side is winning" -- Warren Buffett

[stevenleser]

189. The Noriega, Paredes, Torrijos right wing triumverate government in Panama was very anti-racist

In fact, most of the poor and those of pure African descent were in favor of that regime. When the US invaded, it was the poor who defended Noriega and joined the dignity battalions. But Noriega, Torrijos and Paredes were not left wingers, they were all generals and very right wing.

I happen to be very familiar with the situation since my family on my mothers side is Panamanian, I have spent a lot of time there and I met all three men and the opposition.

[Beacool]

18. Here we go again!!!

Another Chile, another Argentina, another Paraguay and another military junta trained at the School of the Americas.

Presidents come, presidents go, but the SoA remains in business.

x(

[zulchzulu]

40. Perhaps renaming "School of the Americas" to "School of the Death Squad Overlords" might be easier..

... for those who go there to defend. After all, the new name would be more accurate.

[Brother Buzz]

140. The School of the Americas was renamed the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation

The 2001 name change was an attempt to fly unmolested under the radar

Despite the name change it is still a combat training school for Latin American soldiers, located at Fort Benning, Georgia. "School of the Death Squad Overlords" would not be an inappropriate name.

[Ken Burch]

173. And they'd probably get a great logo out of that name, too.

n/t.

[SuperTrouper]

41. Manuel Zelaya was a despot and thought that he was above the law. He was oppressing the Honduran

people. If you watch CNN en Espanol you will see the happiness of the people in getting rid of that dictator-in-training. President Roberto Micheletti is a very decent man who wants to obey the Constitution, something that was being disregarded by the despicable Manuel Zelaya. The Honduran Armed forces did their duty in obeying the Congress and the Honduran Supreme Court to depose that man who wanted to use the country as his own hacienda. Finally there will be true democracy in Honduras and there will be elections on 11/29/09 as scheduled. The COngress voted unanimously to remove Zelaya, even his own party (Liberal) denounced him. Let Zelaya go to live in Venezuela or Cuba, finally the Honduran nightmare is over. And the other countries should not get involved in Honduran affairs; President Obama is concerned but he again undelined the fact that this is a Honduran internal affair and the Hondurans should solve it...they already did. Bye bye Zelaya, traitor to the Honduran motherland.

[Colobo]

43. Excellent post.

[Ken Burch]

46. You'd have posted the same thing about Allende in '73

n/t.

[SuperTrouper]

52. You are totally wrong and off-base. I know about Chile, I have talked to Isabel Allende and I have

read extensively about the Salvador Allende incident. It was a crime to depose and assassinate the Chilean pPresident. Salvador Allende was extremely popular in his country and we in America have that shame that the Nixon Administration and the CIA participated in that massacre to bring the savage Pinochet regime. Zelaya was not popular, he was reviled by the Honduran people; Salvador Allende was adored by the people of Chile.

[Ken Burch]

54. If you backed Allende, how could you EVER support a military coup anywhere?

The military is always against the people.

Nothing positive can come of this. Certainly nothing good for the poor and the workers.

[SuperTrouper]

58. IT WAS NOT A MILITARY COUP! It was a Constitutional exercise

to get rid of an incompetent and tyrannical President ordered by the legislative and judicial powers to re-establish a balance of power. Even Zelaya's Vice-President denounced him and resigned the Vice-Presidency. The military is not in charge, the three powers are; President Micheletti, the Honduras SUpreme Court and the Honduran national Congress. Finally there is a power balance and the military is under the Commander-in-chief President Micheletti. Zelaya wanted to have the Executive power completely above the judicial and the legislative branch.

[Ken Burch]

61. If Micheletti is in power after a coup, he's under the control of the military.

he can neither be a democrat or a progressive if generals put him in office.

Why are you defending the rich? They're the only ones who could've wanted this. No poor Honduran and no Honduran of color would ever back a military coup. Coups are always racist and right-wing.

[Marsala]

65. You sound ridiculous, insisting that the military is ALWAYS EVIL

If the military is acting under the legitimate orders of the government and those orders are just, then they aren't doing anything wrong. Just because some other military in some other country decades ago imposed tyranny doesn't mean that MILITARY IS BAAAAD!

[Ken Burch]

70. In Latin America, it is.

No military there ever acts for the good of the poor or the workers.

The Congress and the Supreme Court were solely controlled by the elite. It's only the elite that wanted the referendum stopped.

[NoPasaran]

168. When the FARC drove the invaders into the sea at Playa Giron

Were they not acting in the interests of the poor and the workers of Cuba?

[troubledamerican]

162. Another Neocon defending use of military instead of civil impeachment

[SuperTrouper]

74. The rich are not happy in Honduras. They were getting a pass from Zelaya

and were allowed to displace farmers to acquire their lands (even Zelaya's family was doing this in Olancho). My rich aunt and uncle in Santa Barbara were allowed not to pay taxes so they could look the other way. Some of the elite really wanted Zelaya to stay in power four more years to continue raping the country. Micheletti has vowed to put an end to the Zelaya policies and as we write here, some landlords in Honduras are preparing to hide their riches in Miami to avoid the crackdown by the Honduras three powers. At any rate, i will not defend the rich in Honduras, the Liberal party, Micheletti's Party has thrown all its support to the new Preseident to pursue the Liberal agenda in Honduras

[boppers]

87. Fidel was racist and right wing?

Chavez was racist and right wing?

What?

[SuperTrouper]

92. Here are over 1000 comments from Hondurans happy to be rid of Zelaya (in Spanish)

http://www.laprensahn.com/content/view/section/244684

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

148. Wait I thought the rich were supporting him. How many poor people have access to the internet in

Honduras.

[troubledamerican]

163. I can find 10,000 comments from anti-Morales right-wing Bolivians looking for a military coup

[Ken Burch]

98. Chavez was elected

And leading a guerrilla movement isn't the same as being a general.

And neither of them attended the School of the Americas.

Why can't you just admit that the entire Latin American military class is irredeemable?

[boppers]

109. Both Fidel and Chavez led attempted coups.

Claiming whole classes of people are "irredeemable" is not progressive.

You may hate the military, but demonizing every poor person who got a job in the army to feed his family is morally wrong.

[provis99]

194. no, Allende was not popular when he was overthrown.

There were riots in the streets against his rule, his own Congress was against him, the rich were uniformly against Allende. I don't believe you've ever talked to Allende's wife, name-dropper, because you don't have a clue what was happening in Chile.

[Ken Burch]

47. None of the poor in Honduras are celebrating.

They know the army is going to start slaughtering them. That's what all Latin American rightists do.

[SuperTrouper]

60. What's wrong with you people. How do you know that? People in Santa Barbara, Olancho, Intibuca,

Lempira are celebrating. They had their lands in Olancho taken over by the family of Zelaya and then they were expelled to Olanchito and Trujillo. I have family all over Honduras, some middle class others very poor and they are relieved that Zelaya is gone.

[Ken Burch]

62. If you ever defend a military intervention in politics, you've joined the right.

No military intervention in domestic politics can be progressive or positive.

The army is always against the people, everywhere. Chile proved that for all time.

[SuperTrouper]

78. The military in the USA defend the people. They were not happy with Bush and they

respect and admire Obama...I know because one of my brothers is a Us marine Colonel and the other is a US Army Sargeant. The military's job is to protect the country and to serve the President. The Honduran military is dedicated, patriotic and they have proven today that they obey the three powers...otherwise we would have seen a military Generalor Colonel taking power like they did so many times in Honduras' violent history prior to 1982.

[Ken Burch]

86. It would still have to be evil if the U.S. military overthrew the U.S. government

Even YOU couldn't possibly defend that.

[SuperTrouper]

88. I'll give you that point. nt

[Ken Burch]

91. Thank you for at least supporting democracy HERE.

I hope you have some compassion for the innocent Hondurans who are going to be killed by the military.

[boppers]

90. The military did not overthrow the Honduran government.

They overthrew a would-be Honduran dictator.

I would not only defend that happening in the US, I'd expect it, it's in our military oath.

[troubledamerican]

165. "The military respect & admire Obama" is yet more pablum. Some hate Clinton, Bush, & Obama. SO

it's their job to "depose" and assassinate elected officials?

Look up the word "impeachment". The military has NO PLACE in the democratic process except at the ballot box.

[HamdenRice]

143. I wouldn't go that far. The military ended fascism in Portugal and freed its African colonies

I think you correct in general about the role of the military, but there have been exceptions of left wing military coups or the military restoring constitutional order.

Iirc, Jerry Rawlings of Ghana and Obasanjo of Nigeria have also played positive roles at times.

Not something one wants to see simply for the sake of constitutional continuity, but you can't make a categorical rule based on historical example that no military has ever played a progressive role.

[ButterflyBlood]

196. OMG nuance! We can't have that here!

While hardly a supporter of the Honduran coup, the broad-brushing and logical fallacies in this thread are making my head hurt. I mean just read this:

"The army is always against the people, everywhere. Chile proved that for all time."

So in other words one example in history has proven something to be the absolute truth in all circumstances until the end of time. Please tell me I am not the only one seeing a problem here...

[HamdenRice]

203. You're not the only one!

But illogical, categorical thinking has kind of swamped this place since the elections.

"Chile proved that for all time" indeed.

[ButterflyBlood]

204. The funny thing is that even Hugo Chavez attempted a military coup

And this poster is defending him. Maybe there should be a lesson here to simply not speak in ridiculous absolutes.

[troubledamerican]

164. Surprise. "I have family all over Honduras" -- how did I know?

You can just smell the landed gentry behind the mask.

[Odin2005]

93. +1. Wish I could rec posts because this is a good one.

Too many DUers are engaging in black and white thinking.

[flamingdem]

103. QUE ??

I saw footage on CNN of the people pummeling the soldiers, who look to be about 14 years old, with their bare hands in the street.

YOU SIR ARE CONFUSED.

Obama is against the coup. Democratic leaders are all against the coup.

[troubledamerican]

161. Words of a Neocon

"This is a Honduran affair" is such a load of Neocon boilerplate.

If the Supreme Court in Australia declared that PM Rudd was breaking the law, and so ordered the military to depose him instead of impeachment, all democracies would condemn it and declare it an obvious coup d'etat.

Fascinating to watch the slimy, scaly Neocons come out of the woodwork to support anti-democratic processes.

[mudplanet]

214. I wish the US had said

"This is an Iranian affair," "This is a Chilean affair," "This is a Nicaraguan affair," "This is a Panamanian affair," "This is a Guatemalan affair," "This is an Angolan affair," "This is a Vietnamese affair," "This is a Lebanese affair," "This is a Salvadoran affair."

Instead, they said, "This is a Rwandan affair," "This is an Indonesian affair (Timor)," "This is a Nigerian affair (Biafra).

[IndianaGreen]

198. I'll bet you watch Faux News and listen to Rush Limbaugh to boot!

Here are photos of Hondurans overcome with happiness:

[Ken Burch]

45. Venezuelan, Cuban and Nicaraguan ambassadors to Honduras kidnapped

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3942967

Yeah, this was just that nice Honduran Congress standing for democratic purity.

[SuperTrouper]

63. AND CHAVEZ HAS SAID THAT HE IS GOING TO INVADE HONDURAS. There is a "toque de queda"

or curfew in Honduras because Cubans, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans are trying to cause chaos in San Pedro SUla and Tegucigalpa. The Honduran President has warned that this type of behavior is not going to be tolerated. Honduras does not want to be Communist, they do not even want to be socialist, they want to wmulate us in America and are quite happy that finally there are lines of communication open with the US under President Obama. Bush and his despicable policies in Latin America caused a reaction to bring Evo Morales, Hugo Chavez, Michelle Bachelet, and Daniel Ortega to power. Not the Latin Ameircan countries want peace and propsperity and are moving to the center-left.

[Ken Burch]

68. Chavez is defending the Honduran people from fascism

Here's a very good summary of what people in Honduras were being killed today to prevent, from the Daily Kos:

" 1. What had been set for today, what the coup leaders have impeded, wasn't the permanent re-election of Zelaya or a lifelong presidency. It wasn't even a reform of the constitution. What was going to be voted on was an unrelated referendum to ask Hondurans if they would like, in the next elections, the ones in Novembre, to vote to create a Constituent Assembly to reform the constitution. In summary, it was something so inoffensive as to ask whether to ask to reform the consitution.

2. The current constitution of Honduras establishes one term of 5 years for Presidents. Zelaya finishes his mandate in November, and in whatever case, he couldn't have been re-elected because any reforms would take place after he's out of office. It would have been a lot for a vote for reforming the Constitution in November. He has himself denied that he wants to run for re-election.

3. The Supreme Court that ordered the expulsion of Zelaya wasn't the Supreme Court in the European sense. To start, the full name is the Supreme Electoral Court, and it's composition is determined by the Parliament (in other words, of the parties that are confronting Zelaya, the coup leaders are from the military), and it is authorized to regulate elections, not detain elected presidents. It isn't the first game from this "institution." When Zelaya unexpectedly won the elections the SCE delayed his installation for a month with technical excuses."

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2009/6/28/10338/0297/495#c495

That's all that was going to happen. There was nothing evil or dictatorial in it. And there's nothing in that that could POSSIBLY justify people being killed in the streets of Tegucigalpa or ambassadors of honorable and sovereign countries being kidnapped. Now people will be tortured and killed by the army.

You're dishonoring the memory of Salvador Allende in defending this coup.

[SuperTrouper]

80. Here you'll see Chavez' vow to invade Honduras to impose a wicked President

on the Honduran people:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvNpsk5aEz4

I hope you bother to read what people are saying (Mostly in Spanish). Zelaya just accused CNN En Espanol of being "fascists" for asking him questions such as why are Hondurans celebrating his overthrow and why nobody in the country is coming forward to defend him?

We as Americans should support the respect of civil rights and support the happiness of our fellow Americans (Latin Americans) I know our first reaction is to say "Coup d'etat, but Honduras' events today are not like Iran's events last week.

[boppers]

96. Allende was a theif and a despot.

He crashed Chile's economy, drove the country into such chaos and violence that law practically disappeared, and set the stage for Chile's near-destruction by brutal military dictators supported by external governments.

As to your points:
1. This is illegal in the US, as I suppose it also is in Honduras. Citizens don't just "get together and re-write the constitution", such changes are supposed to pass through existing governmental bodies. Reading more into it, congress has this power in Honduras, not the president.

2. His mandate is finished. Not in November, now. The Honduran government found him unfit to continue to serve.

3. The SCE found he was doing something illegal. He refused to obey law, congress sent the military to enforce the law.

Toturing and killing people is, indeed, wrong. So is trying to be a dictator.

[Ken Burch]

100. You've just demonstrated which side you're on.

Allende oppressed no one. And the Chilean economy crashed because of Nixon and Kissinger's blockade. And he can't be blamed because the Chilean military betrayed their constitutional obligation to remain loyal to the elected civilian government.

[boppers]

110. Makiing poor people poorer = oppession.

Sure, the blockade cost, but so did the removal of massive amounts of foreign investment, via policies that said any such investment was possibly going to be defaulted upon. Add in the 70's copper crash, and you have a bad problem was made worse by bad policy.

The Chilean military also betrayed their mission, no doubt about that.

[troubledamerican]

155. Bingo. Amen.

[readmoreoften]

101. WOW. You're AGAINST the moderate left government of Allende? And you blame

Allende for Pinochet? Who the US, Ford, and ITT installed?

Oh my god, we're in Neoliberal Underground.

[Ken Burch]

104. To use an overused(and unjustly used)phrase from the Israel/Palestine forum

The masks are slipping.

[readmoreoften]

107. Big time.

While I don't think that the use of the military always means a repressive rightist coup (ex: the Russian Revolution, Chavez' uncoup after the coup) anytime a rightist does it, it's a repressive rightist coup. Especially a rightist backed by the SOA.

Fucking disgusting.

[boppers]

114. Yeah, sorry, not a Marxist.

I'm a progressive, not a regressive still latching on to failed 20th century ideas.

[Ken Burch]

116. The Eighties and Nineties have shown that capitalism can never help the poor

All capitalism is Reaganism.

[boppers]

122. Your tautology is broken.

Perhaps because you are limited by thinking in tautology.

Check this:
http://www.kiva.org/

Loans (driven by capitalism) to the poor.

[Ken Burch]

124. Those would be the loans at punitive interest that were given to working class people

instead of the wage increases they should have been given?

Our economic nightmare at this moment is driven by the rich deciding to replace the decent wages the working class got prior to 1975 WITH LOANS.

That's why we're where we're at, pal.

The rich aren't on our side. Sept 15th proved that, for all time.

We need to take control of the economic decision-making power, and to do so now. Economic democracy is the only hope. Short-term gain for the few doesn't build a strong economy.

[boppers]

127. Uh, I take it you didn't surf much.

It's designed to make the poor into the rich. They can then make the other poor, rich.

What do you mean by "Economic democracy"?

Does that mean that people can vote to make you poor?

[stevenleser]

212. You are wasting your time and this is why I hate debating hard core socialists and communists

They have one tool, a hammer (class struggle) and so everything looks like a nail (needs destruction of capitalism)

[fascisthunter]

136. not a Marxist, but the extreme opposite which is just as bad.

nice image of Obama there... you almost had us convinced...lol

[IndianaGreen]

200. Failed 20th century ideas, such as markets must run free as they please?

Thank you for your support for all the greedy bankers and financiers that got us into this mess!

It is people like you that have made Marx relevant to a new generation of young people across the world. Gracias!

[boppers]

112. Nationalization of entire industries is moderate?

Seizing massive amounts property for government use is moderate? Starving your people, for ideological reasons, is moderate?

This isn't Neomarxist Underground. The Democratic Party still believes in private property, last I checked.

No, I don't blame Allende for Pinochet, I blame Allende excesses for making Pinochet possible.

[Ken Burch]

113. Nothing short of nationalization would've helped in Chile

And Allende never starved anyone. In fact, while Allende was president, poor kids in Santiago had milk each day for the first time. None of the "moderate" governments in Chile ever helped the poor.

[boppers]

121. Yeah, milk.

Really.

People are starving, the economy is crashing, and the solution is a drink of.... milk?

From wikipedia:
"However by 1972, the Chilean escudo had an inflation rate of 140%. The average Real GDP contracted between 1971 and 1973 at an annual rate of 5.6% ("negative growth"); and the government's fiscal deficit soared while foreign reserves declined . The combination of inflation and government-mandated price-fixing, together with the "disappearance" of basic commodities from supermarket shelves, led to the rise of black markets in rice, beans, sugar, and flour."

But hey, the poor had milk. No food staples, no jobs, but have some milk!

"The Allende government announced it would default on debts owed to international creditors and foreign governments. Allende also froze all prices while raising salaries. His implementation of these policies was strongly opposed by landowners, employers, businessmen and transporters associations, and some civil servants and professional unions."

At least they had milk.

[Ken Burch]

125. No good would've come of paying those debts

They were incurred by the previous right-wing governments and paying them would only have benefited the international ruling class. It wouldn't have helped the poor and the workers at all.

A rising tide only lifts the yachts. The other boats are chained down.

[boppers]

128. Boat metaphors now?

How did defaulting on the loans work out?

Oh, yes, it caused massive amounts of death, violent suppression, and a bunch more folks in poverty.

Yay.

[Ken Burch]

132. I was mocking the right-wing "rising tide lifts all boats" metaphor

The one you basically seem to agree with.

[mudplanet]

218. My favorite Republican metaphor

is the Trickle Down Theory, where the rich stand on top of the ladder and piss on everyone else's head.

[troubledamerican]

154. Troll. #1 most ludicrous comment I've ever read on DU.

"Make the economy scream"

That is the money quote from Richard Nixon to Henry Kissinger regarding Salvador Allende's elecion.

Google that quote. It's famous. Nixon & Kissinger crashed Chile's economy.

Secondly, the word thief is not spelled "theif".

Third, blaming Allende for "setting the stage for" Pinochet & the CIA coup is proof you're a Neocon. Probably a South American Neocon. Probably from a wealthy Chilean family.

Nice try, thanks for playing.

[IndianaGreen]

199. So why has the golpista government declared martial law?

And censored the press? Obviously the only support the golpistas have is among the Honduran elites, not the vast mass of people.

[Political Heretic]

206. You statement is factually, provably false.

"He crashed Chile's economy, drove the country into such chaos and violence that law practically disappeared, and set the stage for Chile's near-destruction by brutal military dictators supported by external governments."

This is simply factually incorrect. I mean I don't know what else to say, am I supposed to give you a list of history books to read? It's just completely at odds with clearly documented history.

[Flaneur]

207. A: "Allende was a theif and a despot"

Q: What are sentences I never thought I would read on DU?

[SuperTrouper]

83. Excellent discussion here! Love it..good night to all of you!

;)

[COLGATE4]

94. I'm fascinated by your love affair with leftist governments in Latin America

A couple of quick questions: What do you base your experience in Latin American politics on? Have you ever lived in Latin America?

[Ken Burch]

102. I know who's on the side of the people.

It's only been the left in Latin America that treated indigenous peoples with respect, only the left that supported workers' rights, only the left that opposed the military dictatorships in the Seventies and Eighties(all of the "responsible" centrists backed the juntas).

I'm biased in favor of the powerless against the powerful. Is there something wrong with that?

[readmoreoften]

108. It's only the left that does that anywhere on earth. And when the leftist is a charlatan

its because he's actually a rightist opportunist in disguise, and the left needs to rise again.

[COLGATE4]

120. You didn't answer my questions

You purport to speak authoritatively on the supposed benefits of leftist political regimes in Latin Anerica. I asked you to identify the basis on which you form your opinions, specifically as to whether you have any real knowledge of Latin American countries. From your answer, it appears npt. Case closed.

[Ken Burch]

123. I had a lot of friends who worked in Nicaragua

I've extensively studied the Allende era in Chile and the history of U.S. interventions against the people.

Case not closed.

You have no case to make that Latin American countries are better off under non-left wing governments(not regimes-the term "regime" implies illegitimacy, and the governments I've supported in Latin America were NOT illegitimate).

You have no case to make that rich ever help the people.

[Ken Burch]

129. BTW, you started a thread where you complained about executive pay caps being taken out

of the bailout. Letting the rich off the hook and requiring the poor to make all the sacrifices is what non-leftist governments always do. You need to face the contradictions.

[roody]

131. Thanks for your patience KB.

[Flaneur]

150. Glad you settled that to your satisfaction.

Stupid, meaningless post. This is an anonymous internet forum. I claim to be 150 years old with extensive experience living the Latin American revolution, so I know what I'm talking about, so there. Case cloased.

[mudplanet]

219. Whether leftist governments have improved the economic lot of the average

person in Latin America (and I think they have) is beside the point. No one should have to live with someone's boot on their throat, and that's been the reality for poor people (60-90 percent of the population) under right-wing governments in Latin America.

Give me liberty or give me death.

[readmoreoften]

106. I'm fascinated by your assumption that rejecting rightist military and paramilitary coups

is equivalent to "a love affair" with leftist governments.

This is becoming Neoliberal Underground.

(Oh, and for your information: Mexico and Nicaragua.)

[mudplanet]

133. At first I suspected boppers and Supertrooper were CIA plants

but as the discussion went on it became apparent that at least one is just a garden variety closet fascist.

If you're really for a democracy and rule of law (as opposed to a military dictatorship) you'd recognize that the correct way to remove a president is impeachment, not coup. No, I haven't read the Honduran constitution, but I'd bet my ass that it doesn't say, "If the president acts in an unlawful manner, the army should knock down his door and kidnap him and any other foreign diplomats that may sympathize with the president's policies." There is probably a legal solution that is outlined in the document somewhere.

Allende was a theif and a despot? Chile's economy was headed for the trash can long before Allende, and Allende's major crime was to try to turn Chile into something resembling a Western European liberal democracy. The idea that some resources should belong to the state (nationalization) while it's perfectly ok to own private property isn't particularly revolutionary.

Somebody get this bircher out of here.

"the happiness of the people in getting rid of that dictator-in-training"?? Yea, they're so happy the army has come out in force to keep them from partying too hard. By the way, photos are beginning to surface all over the web of Hondurans that don't look too happy about the coup. Try the BBC.

The Cuban, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans are plotting to turn the country into a communist dictatorship? Jesus wept, from what John Birch daydream did this nonsense come from?

[boppers]

134. Ooh, which am I!? (I guess I'll find out?)

He was "impeached", in that he was not found "fit to serve" anymore.

Once their congress realized that he wasn't going to accept the impeachment, force of law was invoked.

OTOH, the ambassador bullshit, I think, is wrong.

Allende was no perfect saint. I think the best explanation is that he tried to crash-course a marxist economy on top of a colonialist economy, and misery was the result.

As far as creepy dictators, I certainly won't say everything is good in Honduras now (it's still totally wrong), but I'd also note I think that mandating TV and radio shows to disseminate government media for 2 hours a day is also monumentally wrong.

Wait, I'm a "bircher"?

For advocating freedom of speech, and following law? Wow.

[mudplanet]

146. Allende was no perfect saint

Well, you've moderated your statement from thief and despot to "no perfect saint."

In Honduras freedom of speech has meant you're free to say what you want, but if the conservative government doesn't like what you say then they have the local military or police call you in and have a discussion about their inability to protect you if you don't stop saying what they don't like, which is a not so veiled code for "we're going to kill you and make up a bullshit story about how it was 'subversivos' that did it." Readers of this thread should note that the Honduran military has already summarily executed Zelaya's immediate successor and appointed their hand picked candidate.

Give us all a big break, bopper and supertrouper. You're not in favor of democracy and humanity. You're in favor of the rich owning everything and believe that the poor should take whatever they're given and shut up about it. In your Latin America, "indio" is code for "nigger" and anything that impedes your idea of progress (which in your eyes is a continued accumulation of wealth by the powerful and rich) is "subversion." I've ridden around San Pedro Sula with you and listened as you pointed out the slums and said, "They like to live like that."

And every time some of the poor have organized and tried to do something to improve their lives, you've screamed "communism" and "subversivo" and paid your lackeys to conduct systematic campaigns of torture and murder while you practice your denials in the mirror of your condo in Miami (paid them with part of the money you received from the CIA, the rest of which you immediately deposited into your Miami bank account).

Cuba was run by a government of the corrupt rich, by the corrupt rich, and for the corrupt rich (the essence of a kelptocracy). Under Fidel epidemics of TB and other diseases were ELIMINATED. There may not be any conspicuous wealth in Cuba now, but there also isn't any hunger, or illiteracy, and very little crime and corruption. Fidel may be a despot, but he doesn't live in a fabulous palace, own dozens of pairs of handmade Italian shoes, or have a billion dollar Swiss bank account. Say what you will about him, but he isn't corrupt and he actually has a set of values that he lives by other than those of the usual Latin American dictator, the ones propped up by the CIA, whose values were "Everything belongs to me and nobody else counts = sociopath. And he lived to dance on Ronald Raygun's and Mas Canosa's graves.

Allende's aim was to turn Chile into a liberal democracy. No reports of mass arrests, disappearances, torture and murder under Allende, but you call Allende a "despot." Under Pinochet, mass arrests, disappearances, torture and murder, but you regard him as some sort of hero. In Colombia, a decades-long history of disappearances and murders of political and human rights activists, yet you think that's preferable to the popular, progressive, and tolerant-of-dissent governments in Venezuela and Bolivia.

While fascism is loosely defined, there are some very set characteristics: appeals to rabid nationalism, creation of an insidious "other" that is demonized, labeled as traitorous, and blamed for existing problems, and the forming of a coalition with corporate interests to suppress labor and obtain funding for repressive activities. I think that your statements about Allende and Zelaya and your obvious sympathy with the military reflect your alignment with these activities. Your days in Latin America are numbered.

If it looks like dog poop and smells like dog poop, it probably is dog poop.

[troubledamerican]

156. Lies. The impeachment of Allende failed for lack of votes.

Cute how you try to twist the truth.

CIA-backed & funded opposition parties never had enough votes to impeach. Largely this FACT is credited with the CIA's backup plan to back the military coup.

For someone who claims to "advocate following law", Boppers should have enough respect for legal terms to recognize that "impeachment" is a legal term with a specific definition. Claiming that Allende "didn't accept the impeachment" when there was no impeachment (in fact, in the preceding sentence Boppers uses quotation marks around the word impeachment to signal that s/he's playing figurative games with the term), but then to claim that Allende broke the "law" & that "force of law was invoked" (behind what? A figurative impeachment? And there wasn't even that?) is all yet more evidence indicating the Neocon forked tongue behind Boppers' mask.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

210. Chile was a colonialist economy?

It had one of the highest standards of living in South America.

[Ken Burch]

222. Well, the Aymara, Quechua, Kolla, Rapa Nui, Mapuche, Kavesgar, Yagan, Diaguita,

Aoenikenk, and Selk'nam would've seen it as colonialist, but they also supported Allende as the first Chilean president ever who respected and tried to preserve their cultures. Pinochet criminalized indigenous Chilean culture and essentially Germanized the place when he murdered democracy in '73.

[Abq_Sarah]

145. Mudplanet,

The President was impeached. It was done according to the Honduran, not United States, Constitution.

Zelaya's removal from the country was also within the rule of law:

ARTICULO 42.- La calidad de ciudadano se pierde:

5. Por incitar, promover o apoyar el continuismo o la reelección del Presidente de la República; y,

Here is a link to the Honduran Constitution:

http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Honduras/hond05.html

[Blue_Tires]

135. i didn't know anyone still DID defend it, other than the Gordon Liddy-types

[Orwellian_Ghost]

138. K&R

[Freddie Stubbs]

139. Did Hugo Chavez attend the School of the Americas?

He led a failed coup in 1992.

[troubledamerican]

167. No, because Chavez does not use Death Squads & mass graves like our "ally" Uribe

[Freddie Stubbs]

169. Did Uribe attend the School of the Americas?

:shrug:

[Ken Burch]

174. His generals did.

Almost every general in any Latin American army attended.

I hope even YOU would agree that that torture academy needs to be closed. We should never have taught Latin American armies to see their nations's poor and working-class people as "subversives" and "the enemy".

[troubledamerican]

176. Colombian Generals: Gen. Rito Alejo Del Rio, Gen. Pauxelino Latorre. Uribe is a frontman.

[IndianaGreen]

201. Uribe had his own privately-owned death squads

Do some research on Uribe.

[Ken Burch]

209. See? I knew Uribe was a "free enterprise" kinda guy.

n/t.

[LWolf]

147. I never have defended it.

Neither do I defend any SOA apologists.

[Ken Burch]

175. Glad to hear that.

n/t.

[GreenInNC]

152. Come join us in Columbus Ga. in November

I am on the national council for School of the Americas Watch and we would love to have everyone join us at our annual vigil and march that is held at Ft. Benning in Columbus Ga the weekend before Thanksgiving.

This year will mark the 20th anniversary of the massacre that prompted Fr. Roy Bourgeois to start this organization.

More info can be found at www.soaw.org

[IndianaGreen]

185. What was the US Air Force doing in Honduras on the weekend of the coup?

From US military website:

U.S. Air Force Teams Participate in Honduran Air Show, Donate Proceeds to Hospital

Posted On: Jun 26 2009 12:59PM
By Capt. Candace Park
12th Air Force Public Affairs

6/26/2009 - SAN PEDRO SULA, Honduras (AFNS) -- An international air show united aviators, air forces and Hondurans to share their love of flying to help save lives at a local hospital June 20 and 21 here.

More than 30 U.S. Air Forces Southern Airmen, a KC-135 Stratotanker, two F-16 Fighting Falcons and an F-16 demonstration team deployed to the Honduran Armando Escalon Air Base to participate in the show, which raised more than $35,000 for Mario Catarino Rivas Hospital here.

http://www.southcom.mil/appssc/news.php?storyId=1850

Isn't this a remarkable coincidence, or was this just a cover story?

[Lagomorph]

186. Hardly an invasion force.

The show marked the third year of U.S. Air Force participation and donation of the proceeds to the hospital.

[IndianaGreen]

187. On the weekend of the coup? How convenient!

More like a cover story. As to invasion force, I don't believe the Obama Administration's faux outrage about the coup.

[Lagomorph]

202. We have a humanitarian detachment there as well...

...full time. I doubt the the Honduran government requested an Air Force aerobatics team to back the coup. Those planes don't normally carry weapons, nor were they armed after the coup. We didn't have anything down there that the Venezuelan Air Force couldn't wipe out in 30 seconds if they had showed up. If the two combat capable F-16s had time to arm themselves and take off they would had been out numbered 10 to 1. The aircraft mechanics and nurses would have had to run to the beach and fight off the Venezuelan Marines without air cover.


I'm perfectly willing to believe that the US was not consulted before the Honduran Congress got mad, called the Army and told them to run the President off. We might have got a few phone calls after the fact, but given our current left-leaning government leadership, I'm DAMN sure the right-wing elements of the Honduran government didn't ask them for permission.

They would probably have to call Bush or Cheney to get the new phone numbers from them.

[Ken Burch]

229. Maybe they thought the replicants from "Blade Runner" were on the team

Darryl Hannah could KILL with those thighs, as I recall.

[stevenleser]

213. USAF folks as a cover story? Sorry, that doesnt even come close to working

Not only that, you wouldnt put expensive USAF assets (i.e., planes)on the ground in the middle of what could be a soon to be destabilized country. Not if you knew it was about to happen anyway.

[EFerrari]

227. Not cover, just encouragement. And they don't need to be on the ground

but up in the air where people can see them.

[malletgirl02]

195. I noticed that as well

It is kind of disturbing to see others who responded to your OP defend the coup. As you know all too well coups aren't good for democracy.

[masuki bance]

215. Yes. nt