The imperial mandate arrives in Honduras

[Downwinder]

http://machetera.wordpress.com/2009/11/01/the-imperial-mandate-arrives-in-honduras/

[Peace Patriot]

1. Interesting paragraph from our end of the telescope....

It took four months for the White House to understand the high cost that a coup regime would exact in the region. Beset by the various problems which he faces in his foreign policy, above all, by the rapid deterioration of the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan and the miring of his troops in Iraq, Obama wrested the steering wheel from his Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, the main architect of support for the putschists, and sent Thomas Shannon to Tegucigalpa with the task of restoring order in the tumultuous back yard. Shortly afterward, Micheletti shelved his bravado and meekly accepted what had previously been unacceptable. Of course, Shannon had just laid down the imperial mandate. To sweeten the moment, he publicly expressed his admiration for the two leaders of Honduran democracy: the putschist and the deposed.

November 1, 2009
Honduras: An Improbable Solution
By Atilio A. Boron
English translation: Machetera

-----------------

It'll be interesting to see if this turns out to be the common perception in Latin America--that Hillary Clinton was the bad guy as to the coup, not Obama. I don't know if this writer is just guessing, or has some confirming scuttlebutt. He makes this statement confidently, but without backing it up at all.

It is certainly true that the US seemed to be a "house divided" over the last four months, with Obama saying the right things--Zelaya must be restored, etc.--from Day One, but the US not acting aggressively (as it obviously had the clout to do, when Shannon swooped in) to oust the coup. I wasn't sure about Clinton (and I still am not), primarily because Jim DeMint (a Bushwhack puke) has been blackmailing Obama on Honduras (or ostensibly on Honduras), holding up all Obama's Latin America appointments because Obama supported Zelaya. I had it figured that Obama/Clinton refrained from officially deeming this a military coup, because US law would then not only trigger automatic, severe economic sanctions, but required that the matter be approved by Congress, and the Bushwhacks had set it up so that Jim DeMint was laying in wait for Obama to hand him his ass on this--a stunning setback on L/A policy.

I thought it may have been quite a shrewd move by Obama/Clinton to keep the matter out of Congress, and that seemed very Clintonian. We may not agree with Clinton on much, but she is without question a smart political maneuverer. It was looking to me like an internal "hawks vs doves" (Bushwhack vs Obama) power struggle, within the US government (rife with Bushwhack moles), with both Obama and Clinton struggling to gain control of the government, and Clinton possibly on Obama's side. (She may be a corpo-fascist herself, but she was trying to implement Obama's stated policy of peace, respect and cooperation--and the cooperation part involves deals they want with Brazil, whose president has backed Zelaya 100%.)

So, I suspected Bushwhack moles in the Pentagon, the CIA and the State Dept. (the diplomatic corps, particularly) working with DeMint, McCain, James Baker, Negroponte, et al, to, a) sabotage Obama's policy of peace, respect and cooperation in L/A, and b) secure an important asset (the US military base in Honduras) for Rumsfeld's oil war plan in S/A.

As to the latter, another part of the war plan has EXTREMELY QUIETLY been "signed" this week in Colombia, by the Bushwhack operative in the embassy (Amb. Brownfield)--a deal negotiated in secret, excluding Colombia's congress and its people, and without consulting other L/A leaders (who have strongly objected) for the establishment of seven new US military bases in Colombia. With those bases, the US air/naval bases in Honduras and the US 4th Fleet (reconstituted by the Bushwhacks in summer '08), the US military has Venezuela's main oil reserves and operations (northern Caribbean coast) surrounded. In addition to war planning, these war assets involve a whole lot of US taxpayer booty. The 7-bases deal involves 600 US soldiers and 600 mercenaries and military contracts of every kind and more military aid for Colombia (already receiving $6 BILLION from you and me)--a country with one of the worst human rights records on earth. And this deal for new bases DOES have to be approved by the US Congress. That is where it is heading next.

These things--the Honduran coup, the 7 new US bases in Colombia, the US 4th Fleet and other actions were set in motion prior to Obama, and it is very difficult to know for sure what he thinks of them, but if he wants peaceful relations in L/A, and wants deals with Brazil, consider this: Brazil's president has not only backed Zelalya 100%, he has said that the US 4th Fleet is a threat to Brazil's oil fields (not just Venezuela's), and it is Brazil that proposed a "common defense" in the context of the newly formalized S/A "common market," UNASUR. The new left in L/A (an overwhelmingly successful political movement, with leftist presidents elected in almost every country) considers the US military a threat. They don't like it or the US "war on drugs." Latin Americans overwhelmingly want the US military out of their countries. Ecuador, Bolivia and Paraguay have kicked them out, recently. Interestingly, Mel Zelaya had proposed converting the US military base in Honduras to a commercial airport--which likely sealed the coup from the point of view of Pentagon war planners, and may be why the US commanders at their Honduran base stood down when the plane carrying the kidnapped president stopped at that base for refueling. There may be other reasons for that stand-down, but collusion with the coupsters is the no. 1 probability. (And a very interesting question is: Who gave that order to stand down? Obama? Clinton? Neither? The Bushwhack ambassador? The "Southern Command" acting on its own? )

Anyway, this is the line-up of things in Latin America: hawks vs doves; war planning and hostility vs peaceful cooperation. Obama on one side (stated policy) and an array of Bushwacks and warmongers on the other. Where is Clinton in all this? Is she paving the way for war, or trying to implement a better policy against a strong Bushwhack undertow? I don't know the answer to that for sure, nor how sincere Obama is on his stated policy. They did the right thing in Honduras at long last, but it is a lousy, late-in-the-day deal which ignores the people of Honduras and their demand for reform. Was Obama/Clinton's lassitude deliberate or the result of an Obama/Clinton disagreement, or the result of their not being in full control of the US government?

A lot of leftist commentators have been quick to condemn the Obama team, and they certainly have history on their side (past US policy), and they also have reason to distrust both Obama and Clinton because of previous positions (campaign statements, campaign advisors, votes, policies, etc.--especially Clinton, but Obama has not been great on L/A issues either). This commentator is seeing something I also perceived, which was division--a conflicted policy, a US internal struggle--and blames Clinton. I'm still not sure.

[Demeter]

2. I Wouldn't Put It Past Her

It's the Arrogance, Hillary.

[Peace Patriot]

3. He says she was the "chief architect" of the coup. I don't think that's accurate.

I mean, it's possible and believable (of Clinton; less so of Obama). But is that what happened? I think it's more likely that the corpo-fascist parties that she serves were willing to go along with Obama's stated policy of peace, respect and cooperation in Latin America, in order to re-gain ground lost by the Bushwhacks. The World Bank/IMF, the US "war on drugs" (war on the poor) and US global corporate predators like Exxon Mobil and Chevron, have been increasingly rejected, thrown out and frozen out--and France, Norway, England, Spain, China, Russia and other countries and their companies have benefited--because they are willing to play by the new Latin American leftist rules--better deals for their people and their social programs. The Bushwhack idea is to destabilize and topple these governments, assassinate their leaders and reinstall US puppets. However, South America in particular has shown good solidarity in resisting nefarious Bushwhack schemes--as exemplified by the friendship and close alliance of Hugo Chavez/Venezuela with Lula da Silva/Brazil. Da Silva has resisted every attempt to "divide and conquer" and has stuck by Chavez through thick and thin. This new reality is the result of an awesome, widespread, leftist democracy movement throughout the region. It is an historic movement. It cannot be defeated by the usual methods. But the Bushwhacks are like broken records--stuck on the same old methods of torture, death and repression. And they have other plans--I think an oil war plan--for South America. This Honduran coup was for sure instigated in the US, but not necessarily by Clinton. She may just have been caught in the middle--between the Jim DeMint's and James Baker's, on the one hand, and Obama's new policy on the other. She could be more collusive than that--and Obama could also be less sincere about his new policy than is apparent--but I sure see a lot of evidence of active Bushwhack sabotage of Obama's stated policy. And Clinton may be pursuing her own agenda in Latin America, not Obama's, but I don't think she would so obvious about it as to instigate a coup that has placed his policy in serious jeopardy.

[Demeter]

4. I'd Pick Her for Chief Enabler

Naw, I don't think she'd instigate anything, just do a remora on anyone who looked like a good source of blackmail, favors, or whatever.

[Bacchus39]

5. so you don't think there should be an election in Honduras??? n/t

s

[Peace Patriot]

7. An election without civil rights is not an election. And you can't restore civil rights

in four weeks. Hondurans have been denied the right of free speech, the right of assembly, the right of transit and the right of habeas corpus for four months now. Some 25 people are dead--all leftist political activists. Thousands have been tear-gassed, beaten, unjustly arrested, tortured and raped. And all but coup-supporting media has been shut down. How can you have an election in these circumstances?

To be fair, this election should have been postponed for four months, and Zelaya restored to his rightful office for those four months--since the coup robbed him and Honduran voters of four months of his term. Full civil rights restored. Fully functional opposition media. And Zelaya and his cabinet and advisors need time to find out what the golpistas have done to the Election Commission. I understand it's all Mitcheletti appointed now--and many other Zelaya supporters and mere supporters of the rule of law have been purged from the government, and even from teacher's jobs. These wrongs and screw-ups of a functioning democracy need to be corrected. I would also--if I had a say--restart the election process back at the candidate nomination stage, so that new candidates can be nominated for president and other offices. Only pro-coup candidates have been given any air time. This country has been totally messed up, and beset with fear and violence. And absolutely nothing has been done to address the widespread call for fundamental reform of Honduras' putrid political system and crazy Constitution.

OF COURSE I think there should be elections in Honduras. But you seem to think that an election alone constitutes democracy. Democracy does not exist without civil rights. A coup d'etat has occurred. Massive denial of civil rights--to the extreme of death--has occurred. Democratic order has been massively violated, and the people who have committed or ordered these crimes are still in charge and will be in charge of the election. I mean, how anti-democratic do things have to get, before you object?

[Bacchus39]

8. looks like they are going to have an election anyway

we'll see how the new president performs. Honduras needs to get past the Zelaya nightmare, not extend it.

sorry if the non-Honduran "resistance" isn't satisfied with the agreement, but that is what you got.

[Braulio]

9. He's just mad

The "Zelayistas" are mad as heck because they can't get their candidates in. But when it comes to Cuba, they're cool. Cuba has a one party "democracy", and that's fine with communists, as long as it's The Communist Party, and Fidel gets to give the orders from his grave.

[Peace Patriot]

11. It's always interesting to hear the John Birch Society take on things.

So, um, the "Zelayists" being unable to "get their candidates in" is okay with you? Sounds like you would be much more comfortable in a Stalinist system, where, as Stalin himself is reported to have said, "It's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes." In the case of Honduras' pending "election," it will be the very people who overturned the voters last time around, by violently evicting the elected president and declaring martial law to beat up, arrest, torture, kill, purge and repress anyone who objects.

These methods of keeping the other side's candidates out, and only letting approved candidates in, are not okay. And it is a bloody shame that our own supposedly democratic government has now legitimized them for use by pro-US tyrants in the future. This is not about Cuba, Braulio--which virtually every country in Latin America has recognized as having a legitimate government. This is about a US client state, supported by US tax dollars, with a US military base and numerous US corporate operations. You think it's okay that one of the independent candidates for president in Honduras got the shit beat out him and his arm broken for peacefully protesting the coup d'etat? You think it's okay that only coup-supporting candidates get to be on TV? You think it's okay that 26 leftist political activists are dead? You seethe with hatred of Cuban communism, but can't recognize obvious, realtime fascist tyranny unfolding in a US client state? Martial law, Braulio? Suspension of all civil rights? Beatings, rapes, murder? These are justified, in your view, because "Zelayists," in your opinion, think Cuba is "cool"?

I've been around a long time. In fact, the John Birch Society was quite active in the town where I was raised. They had views just like yours. Anyone who advocated social justice--in fact, anyone who merely advocated civil rights for all--was accused of being a "communist." And any horror, any level of repression, any crime, including destroying democracies, was justified, in their view, to exterminate "communists." Martin Luther King was a "communist." The ACLU--who merely advocate maximum LIBERTY--were "communists." Democrats were "communists." Labor union leaders. Teachers. Catholics. Jews. Anybody they hated was a "communist." And this seething hatred led to the US committing ungodly horrors in the world. The slaughter of 2 million people in Southeast Asia, and the loss of over 55,000 US soldiers. The dreadful tortures and deaths of thousands and thousands of people in Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and throughout the Americas. The destruction of democracy in Iran. The destruction of democracy in AFrica. And untold more horrors--against people who just wanted to be free, who just wanted a decent life and a good government. Thus--because of this blind hatred of something called "communism"--the US supported fascist tyranny all over the world! Genocide. Coups. Rule by rich and brutal elites.

It is the saddest, sorriest, most regrettable and tragic thing I know, how the "land of the free, home of the brave" became a bloody-minded fascist empire destroying democracy everywhere it went, and committing horrendous atrocities, chasing this generic bogeyman, "communism." There are wrongs in communist Cuba. And there are wrongs on the other end of the island of Cuba, committed by us. There were wrongs in Stalinist Russia--grave wrongs, genocidal wrongs--but what do you say about 2 million people slaughtered in Southeast Asia because, if the US had permitted Vietnam to vote in 1954, in UN sponsored elections, they would have elected a communist? Is that not equally wrong? 2 million people dead because some of them would have voted in a communist government? That is how insane the hatred of "communism" is. It destroys the very things we love--democracy, fairness, life. It numbs your mind to the atrocities committed in the cause of "anti-communism." And that you must not allow to happen. You must not allow your mind to be numbed.

"Communism" is just an idea, among many, on how to organize society. Monarchy, democracy, capitalism, socialism--all ideas, implemented by people, and taking on the characteristics of the people who implement them. We, the US--the self-described ikon of democracy--have sinned against our own system, gravely, repeatedly, so that we ourselves only have the remnants and tatters of the democracy we inherited from our Founders, who constantly warned against--and did everything they could to prevent--a tyrannical president with a big standing army. Are we even true to capitalism and "the marketplace"--with all these huge multi-national corporations and their monopolies? Communist systems collapsed and only one survived--Cuba's. Why? Could it be that Cuban communism is not so bad? What's good about their system? What's good about ours? What can we salvage? What can we use? What works? With the capitalist system now threatening to collapse, and Planet Earth itself at grave risk, we need some new ideas, and pronto, if we are not to be the last humans. Kneejerk hatred of "communism" is really old hat, Braulio. And accusing people who are merely socialists, or not even that, who merely want their capitalist democracy to work better for everyone, of being "communists," is inaccurate and unfair. It numbs the mind--not only to the atrocities committed in the cause of "anti-communism," but also to the beauty of democracy, that it permits and fosters change.

If a state like Honduras becomes putridly corrupt, democracy permits a remedy--if democracy is allowed to function, and is not brutally repressed. The golpistas should have permitted the vote on the Constituent Assembly, and then should have engaged with the labor unions, the human rights groups, the religious advocates of the poor, the community organizers, the teachers and all the grass roots groups representing the majority on how their needs could be met, and how their system could be corrected to make it more inclusive and fairer. Why were the golpistas afraid of that discussion? Well, one of their generals said it: He said that, by their coup, they were "preventing communism from Venezuela reaching the United States."

Aside from his hubris, in presuming to protect us from this disease, "communism," and aside from who he may have been colluding with here, he is calling people who want to participate in their democracy, people who want a decent minimum wage and a decent life, people who object to oligarchic rule, "communists." And that is the same tragic mistake that the US has made since the Korean War--the demonizing people who merely want fairness. You demonize them, and then you feel justified in dropping napalm on their villages, dropping them out of airplanes, chainsawing them while alive and throwing their body parts into mass graves, gathering them in stadiums and shooting them, beating, torturing, killing them wholesale, in the millions. Not because of any crime they have committed, but because they are "communists." And then there are all those "terrorist" children in Iraq and Afghanistan, blown to smithereens by our bombs. Beware of numbing your mind with words like "communist," Braulio. Is it an accurate description of people who just want a decent life? Or is it just an excuse to deny their humanity and strip them of human and civil rights?

[Braulio]

12. Why don't they run a candidate and see if they win?

Huh, all I'm saying is the Zelayistas lack the popularity to get anybody elected. That's all.

[Peace Patriot]

14. Zelaya has a 67% approval rating in Honduras--and that's with the objective media shut down

for four months (acid poured on broadcast equipment, reporters arrested, beaten, deported, etc.). So it follows that "Zelayistas"--who comprise 67% of the population--might win a few elections, no?

You say, "why don't they run a candidate?". So, how are they going to do that, huh? The election is four weeks away. The only candidates allowed on TV support the coup. And the golpistas control every aspect of the government, including the Electoral Commission and the courts.

You don't even have an elementary understanding of what's happening in Honduras. Democracy has been DESTROYED in Honduras. The "Zelayists" (most Hondurans) risk getting tear gassed, beaten up, put on lists, fired, arrested, tortured and murdered if they dare to exercise free speech. There is no free speech, no right of assembly, no right of transit and no right of habeas corpus, and the bad guys have purged everyone from government who believe in the rule in law.

Your casual, snotty little post ignores the rotting bodies of 26 leftist activists murdered for objecting to all this. "Why don't they run a candidate?" Because they HAVE NO RIGHTS, that's why--not even the right to life!

[Peace Patriot]

10. "the Zelaya nightmare"? Who shot up Zelaya's house, kidnapped him at gunpoint

and exiled him from Honduras (in violation of a specific provision of the Honduran Constitution forbidding the exile of any citizen), declared martial law, forbade peaceful protest, used live ammunition on protestors, as well as rubber bullets and tear gas, "suspended" the rights of free speech, freedom of assembly, transit and habeas corpus, poured acid on the broadcast equipment of independent media, stole the broadcast equipment of other independent media, arrested, beat up and deported international journalists, shut down all but pro-coup media, unleashed police/military arbitrary arrests, beatings, torture and rape of political prisoners, blocked roads and airport to prevent Zelaya's return, forged Zelaya's signature on a letter of resignation, trumped up charges against him in his absence, purged the government of anyone who supported Zelaya or objected to the coup d'etat including teachers, filled the streets with cops and military, blockaded roads with military checkpoints, and has been conducting a reign of terror in which 26 people--all leftist political activists--have been murdered?

Not Zelaya. All he did was propose a vote of the people on fundamental reform of Honduras' putrid political system--and God knows they need it.

So, who has created a "nightmare"?

"...sorry if the non-Honduran 'resistance' isn't satisfied with the agreement, but that is what you got."

Sorry? You're not sorry, Bacchus39. You're very glad that these murdering thugs get to "share power" with the real president. Cuz that's what you always do--cheerlead for fascists and death squads. I am not part of any "resistance"--Honduran or non-Honduran. I am merely an observer from afar who bothers to think deeply about the bullshit in our corpo-fascist press, bothers to seek out alternative information, bothers to read history, bothers to care about the state of our own democracy and what our government has done and is doing in the world. I'm just an old lady who cares. Who are you, always touting the fascist position on a democratic board? You really make me wonder. What gives you nightmares?

[Braulio]

13. Copper Top

Maybe you took the pill, copper top. But you ain't seen nothing yet. I haven't been afar, I've been there, done that, for over 50 years. And reality is seldom what one thinks it is.

[Peace Patriot]

15. I'd say the reality of being dead is pretty final. 26 people are dead--

--beaten, tortured, shot--for trying to exercise their right of free speech in opposition to this coup and in support of restoration of the real president. I don't know what kind of pills you're taking, but anyone in his or her right mind knows that democracy has been OVERTURNED in Honduras, and an election held in these circumstances is a farce.

"I've been there, done that...". You've been where? Done what? And now you're brain is fried? What are you talking about?

[Braulio]

16. Dear Patriot

What am I talking about? I guess I see in you a lot of what I was many years ago, so I can honestly say as follows:

Where you are, I've been. Also, I've been lucky enough to be there, and witness, many events in many rare and hard to reach places. I won't disclose who I am, nor what I have done, but let's just say that I am sure the FBI, the CIA, the KGB (or its successors), and miscellaneous intelligence agencies have files on me. I can also say I have never committed a violent act, nor helped anybody who advocates violence. They have focused on me because I am somewhat open about my beliefs, and I tend to say things which sometimes I ought to keep to myself. And it so happens that my beliefs bother a lot of people who happen to hold power - and this applies to both the right and the left.

One thing I have done over the years is analyse the way individuals, elites, and societies are brainwashed. It should be clear that all of us are the result of some degree of brainwashing. So it's extremely important to understand our thought patterns have already been channeled, sometimes on purpose, by others. And sometimes those others have "bad" agendas.

I'm glad you understand the American media in particular is designed to brainwash the American people so they support very ugly behavior on the part of the nation, or its representatives. This can range through actions such as the Cuban embargo, the execution of the students at Kent State, the invasion of Panama by the elder Bush, the Kosovo incident and bombing in 99, the invasion and colonization of Iraq, US acquiesence to Israeli ethnic cleansing of non-Jews, and so on and so forth. It's hard for Americans to understand their country happens to be the bad guys very often, and they have been particularly bad since the fall of the Soviet Union.

However, and this is where you do need to mature a bit, it is also important to understand the other side isn't exactly wearing white hats either. Leftists in this world tend to ignore market systems and human nature, and try to build societies which invariably fail - and which can degeneate into the oligarchy of the party ___ - fill in the party's name. The erroneous thought pattern is well reflected in the writings of Marx and Engels, foolish European intellectuals who didn't understand there were much better alternatives to the silly communism they advocated.

This happens in particular when these revolutions are led by the young and the foolish who forget that true change comes by changing people's minds by demonstrably better ideas AND GOOD RESULTS, rather than by personality worship and inventing facts and statistics to prove things are going well, when in reality the system is rotting underneath. I do wish them well, but unfortunately, these leftists are doomed to fail because they carry the seeds of their own destruction. And as Akira Kurosawa told us in his movie "The Evil Ones Sleep Well", there's no assurance that having good itentions leads one to good outcomes. Bad things do happen to good people all the time.

[clear eye]

6. Thanks yet again for an excellent analysis

and a terrific understanding of the limits of our knowledge, and for outlining what has been done so far and what it might mean.