HONDURAN COUP AND THE EXTREMELY WEAK AMERICAN PRESIDENT

UPDATE: August 10, 2009:

Here's an interesting addition: Conn Hallinan, "Honduran Coup: The U.S. Connection," (Washington, DC: Foreign Policy In Focus, August 6, 2009).

Original Post:

Who's more repressive, Roberto Micheletti of Honduras or Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran? (That's not the main topic of this post.) The Obama administration is sure looking like the George W. Bush administration looked when it touted democracy but refused to accept the results in Palestine when the people voted in Hamas. Hamas could have been worked with if Bush hadn't been such a Hellion neocon. That's not the main topic of this post either, but you can surely see the connection to the question above about Micheletti versus Khomeini. It's all about Empire first and the rest be damned.

The people of Honduras elected Zelaya, who did nothing against the Constitution of Honduras when he simply wanted to conduct a non-binding survey to gage the people's popular, democratic attitude about holding a Constituent Assembly (Constitutional Convention) after Zelaya is out of office (after his term would have been over). Someone else would have been President of Honduras then.

The powers that be in Honduras and especially the U.S. come mainly in the form of Dole (Dole Food Company) and Chiquita types. They call the shots behind closed doors and in private phone conversations, etc., in the U.S. government.

Chiquita (Chiquita Brands International, Inc.) was formerly known as the infamous United Fruit Company. They change the name to disassociate or break the continuity of knowledge in the minds of the people concerning that company by a different name and all the despotism it enshrined in Latin America, particularly in Central America and Honduras.

Eric H. Holder Jr., the U.S. Attorney General under U.S. President Barack Obama was the deputy attorney general in the Clinton administration. He led the team of defense attorneys for Chiquita concerning the indictment against Chiquita for paying terrorist {Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (AUC)} in Colombia and in lawsuits against Chiquita for human-rights violations in Colombia by those Chiquita-financed terrorists. They pled guilty; but, naturally, no one was ever held to account for the assassinations and torture. They've also been generally accused of severe labor and environmental wrongdoings, including child labor and exposing workers to illegal and highly dangerous, disease-causing pesticides, among other wrong doing. ("Chiquita Brands International, Inc." SourceWatch.)

This is why Hugo Chavez is unhappy with the U.S. buildup in Columbia (a place that holds a sort of record for murdering union organizers). He sees it as the U.S. setting up to run over Latin America as it has before many times and as it recently ran over Iraq and is in the process of running over Somalia and more so running over Afghanistan and Pakistan in what is Pashtunistan (as much as Kurdistan is not a nation-state in the U.N. but is nevertheless known to exist as the land/state of the Kurds).

The United Fruit Company owned Honduras for all intense and purposes. What it said went. The people were severely victimized.

Dole is the same Dole that overthrew the Kingdom of Hawaii. It just took over the country and put in its own constitution, called the Bayonet Constitution for obvious reasons. They were self-styled evangelical Christian missionaries who did that — lovely people, very Christlike if you think the Spanish Conquistadors were Christlike and the American military was too when it exterminated indigenous Americans and ethnically cleansed vast areas of the indigenous population.

Dole Food Company was also accused by Human Rights Watch in 2002 of terrible treatment of workers very similar to what Chiquita reportedly has done. They were also convicted in Nicaragua of environmental and worker safety violation for use of "Nemagon, also known as DBCP, which was banned in the US decades before after it was proven to cause severe health effects, including vision loss, organ damage, infertility, cancer, birth defects, and miscarriages."

Apparel companies, such as Adidas Group, Nike, Inc., and Gap, Inc., seem to have a large stake in Honduras, and while they are for democracy, they aren't willing to come right out with supporting Zelaya. ("Apparel companies support Honduran president — well, sort of," by Catherine Lyons. Los Angeles Times. July 30, 2009.)

It appears many people are just really afraid that the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas (aka Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas; Bolivarian Movement) to socialism for the 21st century would mean an end to their yuppie lifestyles on the backs of the poorest of the poor throughout the world. Why people can't figure it out that everyone will be better off when everyone is better off is most amazing. I can't wrap my mind around why so many people in the world are this dimwitted yet in high places. Why they can't or don't want to break the chains of their own greedy errors is such a shame for humanity.

Now we have the likes of Lanny Davis (see my August 7, 2009 post: LANNY DAVIS DOESN'T KNOW LAW: HONDURAN COUP) who says that Manuel Zelaya is an outlaw because the Honduran judicial system said so. Never mind that their ruling was a farce concerning Zelaya's non-binding survey. When Greg Grandin said the judiciary was corrupt, Davis challenged that. Today, I read in the New York Times (that can be the tool of the CIA) the:

Still, in the 27 years since this country returned to civilian rule, authorities say, Honduran courts have held only two military officials - Col. Juan Blas Salazar Mesa and Lt. Marco Tulio Regalado - accountable for human rights violations.

ONLY about a dozen other officers ever faced formal charges. And most of those cases, like Mr. Joya's, remain unresolved by a judicial system that remains crippled by corruption.
...
The most noteworthy case involved the illegal detention and torture of the six university students in April 1982. The students said they were held in a series of secret jails for eight days. During that time, the students testified, they were kept blindfolded and naked, denied food and water, and subjected to beatings and psychological torture.

Among those detained was Milton Jiménez, who later became a lawyer and a member of Mr. Zelaya's cabinet. In 1995, Mr. Jiménez told The Baltimore Sun that officers from the battalion stood him before a firing squad and threatened to shoot him.

"They said they were finishing my grave," he said at the time. "I was convinced I was going to die."

Edmundo Orellana, the former Honduran attorney general who was the first to try to prosecute human rights crimes, said it was "absurd" that Mr. Joya remained free.

("A Cold War Ghost Reappears in Honduras," by Ginger Thompson. New York Times. August 7, 2009.)

That's in reference to the Honduran civil war and death squads back by the Reagan administration as it attempted to destroy the poor not only with lying words but also with bullets and torture.

This Joya works right now for Roberto Micheletti as an adviser. What does that tell you? This guy is full of excuses and twisting. There isn't a repentant bone in his body so far. May God have mercy on his soul because Satan, Joya's daddy so far, won't.

He actually lives in the U.S. Imagine that. He's never been held to account because the U.S. is the imperial power over Honduras. Even though that's true, Barack Obama says, "I can't press a button and suddenly reinstate Mr. Zelaya." "We would like to see him be able to return peacefully to continue his term, but we are only one country among many and we are going to deal with this in an international context." "It is important to note the irony that the people that were complaining about the U.S. interfering in Latin America are now complaining that we are not interfering enough." ("Obama says no quick way to end Honduras crisis." Boston Globe. August 7, 2009.)

Now that's just ridiculous. What an evil twist. The interfering that people didn't like is the wicked interfering done by Ronald Reagan, not upholding duly elected presidents. Barack Obama is shifty. I don't trust him at all. He could make one phone call and restore Zelaya without compromise. He'll bomb Afghanistan and Pakistan but won't pull all economic funding and the American military or call for economic sanctions and a complete blockade of Honduras.

I'm not advocating those measures, but they are right there in Obama's power.

He won't exercise them though because Obama works for the same people who employ Roberto Micheletti. They both work for and take their orders from the global plutocrats, the world bankers. Obama fears them. He fears that if he tries to do anything big, they'll remove him, one way or another.

Where is all the news about all the marches in Honduras? The news media was full of images about Iran's CIA-backed Green Revolution, but the anti-CIA movement in Honduras gets scant coverage. Many more people per capita have been killed by the coupsters in Honduras than died in Iran's protests. Unlike in Iran, the Honduran protesters haven't killed any police or military either. You figure it out. I already have.

Why is the CIA for the Green Revolution while against the Honduran People's Movement? Money and control of natural resources and labor are the answers. It's all about Empire. The U.S. already dominates Honduras. Any change empowering the people means less money for the wicked ones in the U.S. It's different in Iran.

The power there is not under the thumb of the Anglo-American-Israeli Empire, so the CIA, MI6, Mossad, and others seek to use a people's movement there as a means to bring Iran under the Empire to exploit it's natural resources and to condition and indoctrinate its children into all the political correctness of America and more so Britain. (Yes, Britain is leading the U.S. into extremes of political correctness that defy all logic. The European Union isn't far behind. Polite hedonism is their religion. Of course, what they consider polite is highly offensive to sanity.)

The CIA, MI6, Mossad outfit surrounding the Iranian Green Revolution, no matter how much the counter-revolution against the dictatorial clerics is also really wanted by some at the street level in Iran, is why all the recent articles in the mainstream press on Iran's show trials have failed to remind readers in the U.S. about the George W. Bush openly stated goal of fomenting regime change in Iran and funding it with some $400 million through the misnomered National Endowment for Democracy. That kind of money buys plenty of violent covert ops, including by proxy, and there is plenty more where it came from.

You can also see it in the U.S. complaining to the Iraqi Shias when they went into the MEK (Mujahadeen-e-Khalq) camp in Iraq to clean them out. The MEK is Marxist (sort of) and the sworn enemy of the Iranian regime that is fundamentalist Shia while those in control of the Iraqi government are also Shia, as is Hezbollah in Lebanon. Neocons in the U.S. have been aiding the MEK under the notion that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."

The MEK had conducted many terrorist operations in Iran. Many were rounded up and secretly executed. It is that sort of terrorism that the Iranian clerics fear happening again if they don't clamp down hard.

They know that the U.S. overthrows regimes. Also, the U.S. is on either side of Iran, in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Iran is only somewhat safe right now on account of Russia and China — both nuclear and both space capable. The Chinese have quickly developed technological capabilities thanks to the U.S. opening up their labor market to exploit. Also, the Russians are amazing weapons developers who are always highly underrated in that department by the U.S. mainstream.

You ought not to think about Honduras without considering at the same time all the different places the U.S. is active. It's a global Empire that sees the whole world and more as the chess board.

The coup in Honduras — and the at best grudging and vacillating support in Washington for the restoration of President Zelaya — has thrown into stark relief a fundamental fault line in Latin America and a moral black hole in U.S. policy toward the region.

What is the minimum wage which a worker shall be paid for a day's labor?

Supporters of the coup have tried to trick Americans into believing that President Zelaya was ousted by the Honduran military because he broke the law. But this is nonsense. A Honduran bishop told Catholic News Service,

"Some say Manuel Zelaya threatened democracy by proposing a constitutional assembly. But the poor of Honduras know that Zelaya raised the minimum salary. That's what they understand. They know he defended the poor by sharing money with mayors and small towns. That's why they are out in the streets closing highways and protesting (to demand Zelaya's return)"

("The Minimum Wage and the Coup in Honduras," Robert Naiman. Just Foreign Policy. Huffington Post. August 7, 2009.)

That's right. Listen, if the greedy executives and shareholders of the U.S. corporations would share more with the workers in Honduras, the prices of the products would not have to go up. It's that simple. How much do you think the chief executives of the main corporations running Honduras make? Do you think that they deserve that much for keeping Honduran peasants down below $5 a day? I don't. I know they don't deserve the huge compensation packages they are paid. They're going to get what they deserve when they come face-to-face with their father-god who is Satan.

What is the real heart of the Honduran coup? Part of it shows in the following:

Dr. Luther Castillo, who was named "Honduran Doctor of the Year" in 2007 by Rotary International, has just sent out an alert through the non-profit group MEDICC, that he and his staff at the Indigenous Garifuna Community Hospital have received an order from the de facto Honduran government to leave the Hospital and discontinue their work there. The government has announced that it is downgrading the standing of the hospital and will be taking over with "new management."

In the meantime, the de facto government has stopped paying the salary of the staff — which includes locally-trained nurses and 10 physicians — and will no longer guarantee medicines or vital supplies.

("Honduran Coup Government Continues Attack on the Poor with Plan to Seize Indigenous Hospital," by Dan Kovalik. Huffington Post. August 7, 2009.)

Although officials insist the administration is not softening its position on Zelaya returning to power and the United States refuses to recognize the de facto regime of Roberto Micheletti, in power since the June 28 coup, analysts said the administration's enthusiasm for Zelaya's return was waning.
...
U.S. politicians have also noted that the coup was triggered by Zelaya's own provocative actions that polarized Honduran society. Zelaya's proposition to legalize drugs and his drift away from a moderate reformist position have highlighted the stark contrast between his policies as president and concerted U.S. endeavors to beat drug trafficking from Latin America. Honduras lies on the transit route for cocaine between Colombia and the United States.
[You will note that there is no mention here about the increase in the minimum wage.]
...
"With [Obama's] current decline in opinion polls, it could turn disastrous for his ambitious policies at home; especially as some will take advantage of this to denounce weakness in his defense of the U.S. interests abroad," said Rault [director of ISRIA.com].
...
The military refused to organize a poll that would have changed the Honduran Constitution and increased Zelaya's time in office. The poll was also opposed by the Honduran Supreme Court and Congress, the attorney general and the supreme electoral tribunal.

("U.S. cooling off on Zelaya's return as Honduran president." UPI. August 7, 2009.)

Note that UPI (United Press International) tells a flat out lie there. It's what is called disinformation.

The poll would not have changed the Honduran Constitution and would not have increased Zelaya's time in office. UPI lies!

Don't you just hate it? I do.

Republicans back the contentions of the leaders of the de facto regime, who say Mr. Zelaya brought about his own downfall by organizing an illegal referendum to try to extend his term.
...
Antonio Tavel, the president of Xerox in Honduras, echoed the views of many in the Honduran business community when he said the Obama administration's tough talk had softened in the six weeks since Mr. Zelaya's ouster. And he said that the steps taken by the United States to put pressure on the de facto government - suspending $16.5 million in military assistance - had had little effect. "I hate to say it," he said, "but their bark is worse than their bite."

("Senator Fears Letter Sends Wrong Signal on Honduras," by Ginger Thompson. New York Times. August 7, 2009.)

Now look at that. Republicans are holding up a flat out lie as the truth. Shame!

Zelaya did not organize an illegal referendum to try to extend his term. What he did was not illegal and was not about extending his term. Those are utter lies, and anyone knowingly repeating them as if they are the truth when they clearly know otherwise is headed for Hell if he or she does not properly repent. That means in earnest. God knows these people's hearts.

Satan is rubbing his hands together at the prospect of getting more and more souls to treat according to their own standards. Wake up. You're being told. It's your chance to change.

A couple of Associated Press writers in Tegucigalpa, Honduras have written that an oligarchy ousted Manuel Zelaya. Those writers say that the oligarchs in other Latin American countries are watching to see what happens. ("Honduran coup highlights power of business elite, which felt betrayed by one of its own," by Morgan Lee and Alexandra Olson. AP. August 6, 2009.)

That's the business elite that Lanny Davis appears to insist doesn't exist.

The elite want to gage what they might get away with under Obama. It goes deeper than that of course. The CIA is working with all the oligarchs in Latin America. It's what they do.

What they mostly want is to topple Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, even though Hugo is democratically elected. That doesn't matter them.

It isn't democracy that the world plutocrats care about. The world plutocrats care about their own power. That's what moves them. Their money is there power. Hugo and others want more fairness. That goes against the plutocrats who tolerate Hugo for a while, while those plutocrats arrange things so they can make even more money via chaos and evil war-profiteering, drug running, sex slavery, black-market weapons deals, and money laundering, etc.

They aren't good people. They need to repent before it's too late for them.

Grandiose gangsters are running the planet. They are heading up the major corporations. They are heading up the major banks. They are heading up the largest governments of the world. It's all cutthroat competition. It's all leading to Hell.

Posts covering Honduras

Donate


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe


  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.