groups

I think the US should back off, until Chavez decides to overthrow the new gov't of Honduras -- then step in and kick C's ass! Ok, so that's how I feel. I'd like to hear from the BO supporters how they rationalize the misinformation regarding a military coup -- and how they rationalize supporting Castro, Chavez, and the OAS. Don't be shy, let's hear how you feel.

It is not possible for Obama backers to say how they really feel without giving away the truth of how they feel about what direction they think our own government should go. Socialism anyone!? I think Obama has sided with those who think like him!

I feel as you do Mike, sounds like everything in Honduras was by the letter of the law and should be commended by our "leaders".

And if Chavez, that little egomaniac, tries to exert any military influence on Honduras, we should have a strike team go in and ask him to please reconsider the consequences of his actions.

Preferably while he is asleep in his jammies.

Let me try and shed some light on things. I am not supporting or condemning any leader. My problem is more with the media. The Miami Herald article is mostly just one-sided accusations and quotes of opinions. Mary O´Grady of the WSJ is known for being frequently off on matters in Latin America. I have found many misleading and half truths in her articles. Narcosphere news wrote: “O'Grady's ideological spin on Latin American events has sometimes been fun grist for this mill of Authentic Journalism.” The media in Honduras is controlled by the elite. Here is a quote from a researched article written by Ismael Moreno for Open Democracy, “The establishment media owned by the country´s elite were quick to connect them, and to try to see evidence of Hugo Chávez´s influence.” Mr. Octavio Sánchez article published in the CSM does present different or altered facts from what I have gotten from what I consider trusted and reliable sources. One must also note that he was a presidential advisor to a president to the opposite party of Zelaya.

I note that the articles print just the names of left leaders and then add Clinton to the fray. But President Uribe of Colombia also supports the return of Zelaya. On June 29 Obama and Uribe met. After that meeting Obama´s exact quote was, “President Zelaya was democratically elected. He had not yet completed his term. We believe that the coup was not legal and that President Zelaya remains the president of Honduras, the democratically elected president there.”

Now the media makes it look like the only thing Zelaya was after was being president longer. Indeed Chavez in Venezuela had a vote and the people elected to let him run again. But even before that and not mentioned much in the US media was that Uribe (very conservative leader in Colombia) had the constitution changed to allow him to break an over 100 year precedent and run a second term. In that there are articles showing corruption to make that happen. And currently there is action in the Colombian congress to allow him to run a third time.

What Zelaya wanted in Honduras was what is known as curate urna or fourth ballot box. Currently when Hondurans go to the polls they get three votes in three different boxes, one for president and vice president, second for parliamentary representative and third for municipal mayor. Zelaya wanted to add a 4th box that did nothing more than ask the question, “Do you agree with convening a constituent assembly to draw up a new constitution?” The last constitution was drawn up in 1980, however it has been changed over thirty times to the point that many believe it to no longer adequately govern the country. In a researched article for Open Democracy Ismael Moreno wrote, “Honduras's laws are reformed mainly to satisfy the power ambitions of the politicians themselves.” Currently there are two prominent political parties in the country. The law as written makes it very difficult to form another party. This obviously helps the two parties pretty much controlled by the economic elite. A change in the constitution could allow for more than one term, but it could make it easier for other parties and for other people to run like Carlos Humberto Reyes who is a trade union leader and human rights activist to run as an independent.

Actually many politicians have supported the making of a new constitution many believing they can write it to their advantage. What they don´t like is Zelaya whose intention was to make it more for the people according to his supporters. In April even the parliament elected president Micheletti supported the 4th box.

In my opinion and from my experience I see the event as political maneuvering for the economic elite to maintain their position and control. To quote Ismael Moreno again regarding the seizure of control by the military, “This sounds progressive and worker-friendly … but is more a trap set by the most conservative business sectors. The business leaders may be worried by a drastic reduction in people´s spending, but they are more interested in gaining a political advantage. “

The information that has come out about our siding with the President of Honduras instead of the people and their government, which to me justifies their removing him -- and pronto, mystifies me. Why the other Central American countries also support him against his duly and appointed officials, also has me stumped. Reports have come out that he intended to abrogate their constitution which has term limits, like ours, and tried to put out a referendum which the Honduras supreme court forbade. So he got them from Chavez, who wants to be dictator for life, the petitions were confiscated and then he, too, and whisked out of the presidential palace and office by military officers. At the direction of the Honduran Supreme Court.

For what it is worth, I supported Obama over the Republican candidates. We have a shameful history of supporting and installing dictators in Central America who override the will of the people and oppress them, sometimes killing them to put down opposition to their brutal reigns.

I want answers, too as to why were are supporting an Honduran president who acted contrary to his country's laws and was justifiably deposed.

Zelaya was only asking for a vote of the people to see if they (the people) wanted to convene a committe to write a new constitution. That new constitution might (Zelaya hoped) include a clause allowing a president to run for a second term. The Honduras media controlled by the elite went out of their way to connect Zelaya with Chavez. They have a fear it could hurt them financially. My contacts in Honduras are telling me that there are both demonstrations for and against Zelaya. However the military are clamping down on those for Zelaya and the media is not accurately reporting the amount for him. Every Latin American leader including the right wing like Uribe of Colombia support Zelaya.

Well, that's very interesting colgringo. SInce I've never heard of your sources, I guess I can disqualify them as well. I have no idea who you are or why you feel you know so much about Honduras, but I do know that my mother used to have an expression that went something like this:

So, Jane's going to jump off a cliff and drown, does that mean that you should also jump off the cliff and drown?

In other words, it doesn't really matter how many countries support the drug-infested, law-breaking Zelaya, it doesn't mean that they are right OR that it's the right thing to do. And no matter what happens, economic and financial embargoes against Honduras are going to do nothing but make life more miserable for the people of the poorest country in Central America.

Bottom line, it's none of our business anyway. So why are we even involved???? Who knows.

The military did something stupid in Honduras, they were supposedly following orders from their Supreme Court. The action was stupid, but the results might be what is better for the country: they will probably hold new elections and Zelaya will not be able to run again.

The hard thing here is to keep Chavez's long tentacles from changing those elections.

Colgringo, you are right, Venezuelan voted Chavez for president, for 5 years!!! It's been 10 and still he has 3 or 4 more to go. They did not vote for that. If a president has the power Chavez has in a country it is impossible to know if the elections were fair or not. And this system is a franchise he is willing to export to any poor country that lets him.

And MtnGirl53 you say "why are we even involved????", but in your first message you said you were expecting a new wave of Hondurans arriving at your community. So EVERYBODY has to get involved. This is everybody's bussiness! In today's world no country's problem is isolated from another's and we are all affected.

pulga, no one in the Obama administration cares about our border situation. That has become very clear.....like crystal. So, we're going to be effected by that no matter what happens. It's a given. So, I stay with my question, why are we involved and I'd add....why are we involved and supporting the wrong side? Why are we willing to apply economic sanctions against the poorest country in Central America? My hunch is that we are involved on the side of Zelaya because everybody else is. No thought or investigation involved.

Mtngirl – Yes, I am new to the group just joining. Actually I found this post by accident and thought to add what I know. You are therefore correct that you do not know me, so let me introduce myself. I have been a freelance writer for over 30 and have lived in South America for the last several years. I cover events here as well as working on a book. My associations are with the common people, but have friends and acquaintances among the elite. I ride public transportation and eat at small places meeting and learning the people. Though I must admit I have a leaning for the working man over the elite. For Eons in my blogs I have written about some of the people in Colombia that I have met. You might enjoy reading those there are 6 so far.

I am very sorry that you dismiss my sources without checking them out. But I can´t blame you, I too am suspicious of both publications and authors until I check them out and determine their motive. My practice is to try for original documents when possible and not rely upon the interpretation of a reporter. Consequently why I mentioned in my post the association of Mr. Octavio Sánchez with the other party.

I figured someone might bring up the jumping off a cliff thing. My father always said the same thing and I agree with it, but also when everyone is saying the same thing and it is in contrast to my thought it makes me want to check it out even more and analyze it. Not saying I am going to agree with everyone, but I like to believe that I put honest effort into why. So when I heard that both right-wing and left-wing leaders were saying the same thing I decided to then investigate a little more.

I agree about the right thing to do. Honduras is the second poorest country in Latin America with one of the most unequal distributions of income, though not the worst. In my opinion based upon my knowledge and information I believe that the administration of Zalaya is more for the people and that Micheletti represents the interest of the economic elite, that have helped put the country into the poverty level it is. Of course that is my opinion based upon my information and everyone is allowed theirs. My intention in the post was merely to provide other things for inquiring minds to consider.