What appears to be an effort to restore Manuel Zelaya to the Honduras presidency through disinformation is being thwarted.
an article appeared on Drudge yesterday as Follows:
Deal may return ZelayaOctober 15, 2009
TEGUCIGALPA. Honduran negotiators have reached agreement on ending a political crisis triggered by President Manuel Zelaya's ouster in a June coup.
''We have agreed in a document on point No. 6, which relates to the restitution of the powers of state to where they were before June 28, 2009,'' Mr Zelaya's representative said.
Restoring the state to the situation before the coup would imply Mr Zelaya's return to office, which had been opposed by Robert Micheletti, the head of the coup-backed interim government.
Mr Micheletti and Mr Zelaya must now ratify the agreement reached by their representatives.
My sources in Honduras have gotten back to me with the following:
After much investigation (from reliable sources) this is what I've found out:
1. Zelaya will not be reinstated
2. What is up for debate is who will determine his non reinstatement... Mel wants congress to decide, we want the Supreme Court of Justice to decide
3. Micheletti will not sihn any agreement that includes Zelaya's reinstatement, as it is against the law, against the constitution and against what 80% of the ppl want
4. The AP, Venezuelan and Argentinian Press are responsible for the misinformation for obvious reasons. Vilma Morales, former CJ and part of the negotiating team on our end, has come out publicly asking them to only report what has been officially signed so as to stop this.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Canada should indeed take a Strong Stand on Honduras
I wrote the following as a letter to the editor in the Globe and mail as a response to this transparent piece of propaganda written by Jorge Heine in that paper.
--------------------
Jorge Heine is right insofar as Canada does need to take a strong stand on Honduras, but he and I have a vastly different understanding of what that one line means, since I disagree with and challenge every other word in his piece.
His suggestion that a coup took place is an outright falsehood, and to refer to imterim President Roberto Micheletti as a "strongman; is about as laughable as one can get, if the situation was not so deadly serious.
Interim President Roberto Micheletti was a democratically elected congressman who is not seeking re-election to congress. He is also a member of ousted President Manuel Zelaya's Liberal party. He was asked to assume the presidency, as per the constitutional line of succession, on an interim basis until what would have been the end of Zelaya's term after the Liberal party controlled Congress voted unanimously to remove Zelaya for having defied a Supreme court ruling against his planned illegal referendum which would have permitted him to change certain articles in the constitution which then would have allowed him to run for president again.
Once again I will refer to Heine's reference to Micheletti as a "strongman", and demonstrate how utterly misleading his statement was, given that Honduras has the one term in a lifetime limit built into the constitution so that no "strongman" could ever rise again in a latin American land which had lived under a succession of dictators prior to the new constitution of 1982. So as to make absolutely certain of this, though some articles in the constutution can hand have been reformed through prescribed mechanisms, the provision for term limits is one of several that cannot be changed for any reason.
Mr Zelaya was removed for having refused to heed the decision handed down by the Supreme Court, and the removal from office was backed up by the armed forces who arrested him and sent him to exile in Costa Rica.
President Micheleti spoke with Greta van Sustern on Fox news, and told her that he will not be running for president, nor can he ver consider doing so, since he has now served as President and is ineligible to run in the November elections.
The western world should realize that if they are on the same side as Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, and Hugo Chavez, it is probably a good idea to go back and re-examine their premises, or better yet stop listening to people like Jorge Heine, and get the facts, free from political colouring.
--------------------
Jorge Heine is right insofar as Canada does need to take a strong stand on Honduras, but he and I have a vastly different understanding of what that one line means, since I disagree with and challenge every other word in his piece.
His suggestion that a coup took place is an outright falsehood, and to refer to imterim President Roberto Micheletti as a "strongman; is about as laughable as one can get, if the situation was not so deadly serious.
Interim President Roberto Micheletti was a democratically elected congressman who is not seeking re-election to congress. He is also a member of ousted President Manuel Zelaya's Liberal party. He was asked to assume the presidency, as per the constitutional line of succession, on an interim basis until what would have been the end of Zelaya's term after the Liberal party controlled Congress voted unanimously to remove Zelaya for having defied a Supreme court ruling against his planned illegal referendum which would have permitted him to change certain articles in the constitution which then would have allowed him to run for president again.
Once again I will refer to Heine's reference to Micheletti as a "strongman", and demonstrate how utterly misleading his statement was, given that Honduras has the one term in a lifetime limit built into the constitution so that no "strongman" could ever rise again in a latin American land which had lived under a succession of dictators prior to the new constitution of 1982. So as to make absolutely certain of this, though some articles in the constutution can hand have been reformed through prescribed mechanisms, the provision for term limits is one of several that cannot be changed for any reason.
Mr Zelaya was removed for having refused to heed the decision handed down by the Supreme Court, and the removal from office was backed up by the armed forces who arrested him and sent him to exile in Costa Rica.
President Micheleti spoke with Greta van Sustern on Fox news, and told her that he will not be running for president, nor can he ver consider doing so, since he has now served as President and is ineligible to run in the November elections.
The western world should realize that if they are on the same side as Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, and Hugo Chavez, it is probably a good idea to go back and re-examine their premises, or better yet stop listening to people like Jorge Heine, and get the facts, free from political colouring.
The Prophecy of Francisco D'anconia
As i watch the decline of the United States that has taken place since Reagan left office, and hit Mach IV speed under the Obama administration, I observed that Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged is playing out in front of us. One of the characters in the book, Chilean copper idustrialist Francisco D'Anconia lets loose at a function about the prevailing mindset at the time which is remarkably similar to today. In it he defines teh meaning of money, and how the lack of understanding of what it is and how it is made vs. obtained and then brings us to a conclusion of what lies ahead if the paradigm is allowed to grow and fester.
Francisco D’Anconia’s Speech: The Meaning of Money
Tuesday, January 1, 1957
“So you think that money is the root of all evil?” said Francisco d’Anconia.
“Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can’t exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?
“When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears nor all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor–your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money, Is this what you consider evil?
“Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions–and you’ll learn that man’s mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.
“But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man’s capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made–before it can be looted or mooched–made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can’t consume more than he has produced.
“To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort except the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return. Money permits you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more. Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss–the recognition that they are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery–that you must offer them values, not wounds–that the common bond among men is not the exchange of suffering, but the exchange of goods. Money demands that you sell, not your weakness to men’s stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy, not the shoddiest they offer, but the best that your money can find. And when men live by trade–with reason, not force, as their final arbiter–it is the best product that wins, the best performance, the man of best judgment and highest ability–and the degree of a man’s productiveness is the degree of his reward. This is the code of existence whose tool and symbol is money. Is this what you consider evil?
“But money is only a tool. It will take you wherever you wish, but it will not replace you as the driver. It will give you the means for the satisfaction of your desires, but it will not provide you with desires. Money is the scourge of the men who attempt to reverse the law of causality–the men who seek to replace the mind by seizing the products of the mind.
“Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants: money will not give him a code of values, if he’s evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he’s evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money. Is this the reason why you call it evil?
“Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth–the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves him; if not, it destroys him. But you look on and you cry that money corrupted him. Did it? Or did he corrupt his money? Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one, would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies without its root. Money will not serve the mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason why you call it evil?
“Money is your means of survival. The verdict you pronounce upon the source of your livelihood is the verdict you pronounce upon your life. If the source is corrupt, you have damned your own existence. Did you get your money by fraud? By pandering to men’s vices or men’s stupidity? By catering to fools, in the hope of getting more than your ability deserves? By lowering your standards? By doing work you despise for purchasers you scorn? If so, then your money will not give you a moment’s or a penny’s worth of joy. Then all the things you buy will become, not a tribute to you, but a reproach; not an achievement, but a reminder of shame. Then you’ll scream that money is evil. Evil, because it would not pinch-hit for your self-respect? Evil, because it would not let you enjoy your depravity? Is this the root of your hatred of money?
“Money will always remain an effect and refuse to replace you as the cause. Money is the product of virtue, but it will not give you virtue and it will not redeem your vices. Money will not give you the unearned, neither in matter nor in spirit. Is this the root of your hatred of money?
“Or did you say it’s the love of money that’s the root of all evil? To love a thing is to know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for the effort of the best among men. It’s the person who would sell his soul for a nickel, who is loudest in proclaiming his hatred of money–and he has good reason to hate it. The lovers of money are willing to work for it. They know they are able to deserve it.
“Let me give you a tip on a clue to men’s characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it.
“Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper’s bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another–their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the muzzle of a gun.
“But money demands of you the highest virtues, if you wish to make it or to keep it. Men who have no courage, pride or self-esteem, men who have no moral sense of their right to their money and are not willing to defend it as they defend their life, men who apologize for being rich–will not remain rich for long. They are the natural bait for the swarms of looters that stay under rocks for centuries, but come crawling out at the first smell of a man who begs to be forgiven for the guilt of owning wealth. They will hasten to relieve him of the guilt–and of his life, as he deserves.
“Then you will see the rise of the men of the double standard–the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money–the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law–men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims–then money becomes its creators’ avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they’ve passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.
“Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society’s virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion–when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing–when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors–when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you–when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice–you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that is does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.
“Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men’s protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it bounces, marked, ‘Account overdrawn.’
“When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, ‘Who is destroying the world?’ You are.
“You stand in the midst of the greatest achievements of the greatest productive civilization and you wonder why it’s crumbling around you, while you’re damning its life-blood–money. You look upon money as the savages did before you, and you wonder why the jungle is creeping back to the edge of your cities. Throughout men’s history, money was always seized by looters of one brand or another, whose names changed, but whose method remained the same: to seize wealth by force and to keep the producers bound, demeaned, defamed, deprived of honor. That phrase about the evil of money, which you mouth with such righteous recklessness, comes from a time when wealth was produced by the labor of slaves–slaves who repeated the motions once discovered by somebody’s mind and left unimproved for centuries. So long as production was ruled by force, and wealth was obtained by conquest, there was little to conquer, Yet through all the centuries of stagnation and starvation, men exalted the looters, as aristocrats of the sword, as aristocrats of birth, as aristocrats of the bureau, and despised the producers, as slaves, as traders, as shopkeepers–as industrialists.
“To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a country of money–and I have no higher, more reverent tribute to pay to America, for this means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first time, man’s mind and money were set free, and there were no fortunes-by-conquest, but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being–the self-made man–the American industrialist.
“If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose–because it contains all the others–the fact that they were the people who created the phrase ‘to make money.’ No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity–to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words ‘to make money’ hold the essence of human morality.
“Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters’ continents. Now the looters’ credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide–as, I think, he will.
“Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns–or dollars. Take your choice–there is no other–and your time is running out.”
++++++++++++
The above is an excerpt from the novel Atlas Shrugged that appears in the Ayn Rand’s Institute website.
Francisco D’Anconia’s Speech: The Meaning of Money
Tuesday, January 1, 1957
“So you think that money is the root of all evil?” said Francisco d’Anconia.
“Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can’t exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?
“When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears nor all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor–your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money, Is this what you consider evil?
“Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions–and you’ll learn that man’s mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.
“But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man’s capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made–before it can be looted or mooched–made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can’t consume more than he has produced.
“To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort except the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return. Money permits you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more. Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss–the recognition that they are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery–that you must offer them values, not wounds–that the common bond among men is not the exchange of suffering, but the exchange of goods. Money demands that you sell, not your weakness to men’s stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy, not the shoddiest they offer, but the best that your money can find. And when men live by trade–with reason, not force, as their final arbiter–it is the best product that wins, the best performance, the man of best judgment and highest ability–and the degree of a man’s productiveness is the degree of his reward. This is the code of existence whose tool and symbol is money. Is this what you consider evil?
“But money is only a tool. It will take you wherever you wish, but it will not replace you as the driver. It will give you the means for the satisfaction of your desires, but it will not provide you with desires. Money is the scourge of the men who attempt to reverse the law of causality–the men who seek to replace the mind by seizing the products of the mind.
“Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants: money will not give him a code of values, if he’s evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he’s evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money. Is this the reason why you call it evil?
“Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth–the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves him; if not, it destroys him. But you look on and you cry that money corrupted him. Did it? Or did he corrupt his money? Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one, would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies without its root. Money will not serve the mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason why you call it evil?
“Money is your means of survival. The verdict you pronounce upon the source of your livelihood is the verdict you pronounce upon your life. If the source is corrupt, you have damned your own existence. Did you get your money by fraud? By pandering to men’s vices or men’s stupidity? By catering to fools, in the hope of getting more than your ability deserves? By lowering your standards? By doing work you despise for purchasers you scorn? If so, then your money will not give you a moment’s or a penny’s worth of joy. Then all the things you buy will become, not a tribute to you, but a reproach; not an achievement, but a reminder of shame. Then you’ll scream that money is evil. Evil, because it would not pinch-hit for your self-respect? Evil, because it would not let you enjoy your depravity? Is this the root of your hatred of money?
“Money will always remain an effect and refuse to replace you as the cause. Money is the product of virtue, but it will not give you virtue and it will not redeem your vices. Money will not give you the unearned, neither in matter nor in spirit. Is this the root of your hatred of money?
“Or did you say it’s the love of money that’s the root of all evil? To love a thing is to know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for the effort of the best among men. It’s the person who would sell his soul for a nickel, who is loudest in proclaiming his hatred of money–and he has good reason to hate it. The lovers of money are willing to work for it. They know they are able to deserve it.
“Let me give you a tip on a clue to men’s characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it.
“Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper’s bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another–their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the muzzle of a gun.
“But money demands of you the highest virtues, if you wish to make it or to keep it. Men who have no courage, pride or self-esteem, men who have no moral sense of their right to their money and are not willing to defend it as they defend their life, men who apologize for being rich–will not remain rich for long. They are the natural bait for the swarms of looters that stay under rocks for centuries, but come crawling out at the first smell of a man who begs to be forgiven for the guilt of owning wealth. They will hasten to relieve him of the guilt–and of his life, as he deserves.
“Then you will see the rise of the men of the double standard–the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money–the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law–men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims–then money becomes its creators’ avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they’ve passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.
“Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society’s virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion–when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing–when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors–when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you–when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice–you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that is does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.
“Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men’s protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it bounces, marked, ‘Account overdrawn.’
“When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, ‘Who is destroying the world?’ You are.
“You stand in the midst of the greatest achievements of the greatest productive civilization and you wonder why it’s crumbling around you, while you’re damning its life-blood–money. You look upon money as the savages did before you, and you wonder why the jungle is creeping back to the edge of your cities. Throughout men’s history, money was always seized by looters of one brand or another, whose names changed, but whose method remained the same: to seize wealth by force and to keep the producers bound, demeaned, defamed, deprived of honor. That phrase about the evil of money, which you mouth with such righteous recklessness, comes from a time when wealth was produced by the labor of slaves–slaves who repeated the motions once discovered by somebody’s mind and left unimproved for centuries. So long as production was ruled by force, and wealth was obtained by conquest, there was little to conquer, Yet through all the centuries of stagnation and starvation, men exalted the looters, as aristocrats of the sword, as aristocrats of birth, as aristocrats of the bureau, and despised the producers, as slaves, as traders, as shopkeepers–as industrialists.
“To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a country of money–and I have no higher, more reverent tribute to pay to America, for this means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first time, man’s mind and money were set free, and there were no fortunes-by-conquest, but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being–the self-made man–the American industrialist.
“If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose–because it contains all the others–the fact that they were the people who created the phrase ‘to make money.’ No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity–to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words ‘to make money’ hold the essence of human morality.
“Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters’ continents. Now the looters’ credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide–as, I think, he will.
“Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns–or dollars. Take your choice–there is no other–and your time is running out.”
++++++++++++
The above is an excerpt from the novel Atlas Shrugged that appears in the Ayn Rand’s Institute website.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Trouble in Honduras
This is a hastily made post, because of the urgency of the matter
there's trouble in Honduras. As many people know, the Supreme Court of Honduras found President Manuel Zelaya in violation of the constitution for trying to hold a referendum that would allow him to seek another term in office. After having lived under successive dictatorships for many years, in 1982, the new democratic government adopted a constution which forbade anyone from serving more than one four year term as president in a lfetime, so that no strongman could ever arise again.
With the backing og Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela, Zelaya tried to hold a referenum to change that part of the constitution, the trouble was, that is the one part of the constituion that cannot be amended. Zelaya was removed from power by a unanymous vote in Congress, and the decision was enforced by the military which arrested him and took him to Costa Rica.
This was immediately condemned as a "military coup" by Hugo Chavez, who pulled just such a stunt to perpetuate his power, and he was quickly backed by his socialist sock puppets in the Organization of American States. Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton joined in, in calling it an illegal coup. The Canadian government and several others joined this group on the wrong side of history. Only Israel and taiwan has expressed support for the legitimate government of Honduras.
Now, Zelaya has sneaked back into the country and is holed up at the Brazilian Embassy in Tegucigalpa. My sources in Honduras tell me that interim President Roberto Micheletti has declared a curfew, whereby nobody is permitted to leave their homes, and troops have surrounded the Brazilian Embassy demanding that the former President to be handed over. There is a stand-off in progress.
This is a call t all who beleive in freedom, liberty and the sovereignty of bnations to stand up and denounce this attempt to restore a wannabee dictator to power. We need good people to call on our governments to get behind the Micheletti administration and to stop kissing Hugo Chavez, Lula, Fernandez-Kirchner and Castro's socialist behinds. I'll be posting some more stuff on this, but for more background on this situation, please vist my archives from June and July. You will see the truth. Our friends in Honduras need your support!
there's trouble in Honduras. As many people know, the Supreme Court of Honduras found President Manuel Zelaya in violation of the constitution for trying to hold a referendum that would allow him to seek another term in office. After having lived under successive dictatorships for many years, in 1982, the new democratic government adopted a constution which forbade anyone from serving more than one four year term as president in a lfetime, so that no strongman could ever arise again.
With the backing og Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela, Zelaya tried to hold a referenum to change that part of the constitution, the trouble was, that is the one part of the constituion that cannot be amended. Zelaya was removed from power by a unanymous vote in Congress, and the decision was enforced by the military which arrested him and took him to Costa Rica.
This was immediately condemned as a "military coup" by Hugo Chavez, who pulled just such a stunt to perpetuate his power, and he was quickly backed by his socialist sock puppets in the Organization of American States. Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton joined in, in calling it an illegal coup. The Canadian government and several others joined this group on the wrong side of history. Only Israel and taiwan has expressed support for the legitimate government of Honduras.
Now, Zelaya has sneaked back into the country and is holed up at the Brazilian Embassy in Tegucigalpa. My sources in Honduras tell me that interim President Roberto Micheletti has declared a curfew, whereby nobody is permitted to leave their homes, and troops have surrounded the Brazilian Embassy demanding that the former President to be handed over. There is a stand-off in progress.
This is a call t all who beleive in freedom, liberty and the sovereignty of bnations to stand up and denounce this attempt to restore a wannabee dictator to power. We need good people to call on our governments to get behind the Micheletti administration and to stop kissing Hugo Chavez, Lula, Fernandez-Kirchner and Castro's socialist behinds. I'll be posting some more stuff on this, but for more background on this situation, please vist my archives from June and July. You will see the truth. Our friends in Honduras need your support!
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Obama leading us to Global war?
Obama leading us to Global war?
Barack Hussein Obama has reneged on a US promise to provide Missile defense for Poland and the Czech Republic... Why? To appease the revanchiste Russian regime of Vladimir Putin. And to add insult to injury, he has done it on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet Invasion of Eastern Poland as per the secret protocols of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty.
Though nominally the President, let's make no mistake about it, Dimitri Medvedev doesn't even take a trip to the loo without Putin first signing off on it, and for Obama to believe he can do business with these people is either a demonstration of an appalling ignorance of history, or a deliberate sellout of western security.
Poland has long been a staunch US ally. Now Poland has been betrayed. So what is Poland to do?
It is my view that as long as Obama is president, the United States is no longer to be trusted or counted on. Ask anyone in Honduras.So Poland, and other countries in Eastern central europe must take measures themselves to protect themselves against Russian aggression.
George W. Bush once stated that he " looked the man in the eye. I was able to get a sense of his soul" John McCain, however, got it right when he said " I looked into Putin' eyes and saw three letters: K-G-B".
Like Chamberlain, Barack Obama seems to believe that appeasing rogue governments is the pathway to peace. In 1936, Adolf Hitler first tested the resolve of western powers by marching a hanful of trrops into the Rhineland. he marched the same troops out and then back in again several times, and the west was sufficiently afraid of confrontation that they let him get away with it. Hitler tested them again over Austria, and then Czechoslovakia and was able to size them up as "liitle worms" as he put it. Had they marched into the Rhinelnad and called Hitler's bluff, the Nazi dictator would have , by his own admission, fallen from power. Instead, the result was a major war 3 years later that took tens of millions of lives and left Europe in ruins.
Now Obama is backing down on all the eastern European allies that George Bush stood up for and John McCain would have stood up for. And even more amazing is that he let his guard down just after the Russians agreed to ship weapons and tanks to the Chavez regime in Venezuela, and is cozying up to Iran.
I believe that Barack Hussein Obama is leading us to just such a war. Chavez is buying these Russian weapons, not to "defend" Venezuela, which has no enemies seriously contemplating, let alone capable of invading them, but rather, he will launch an invasion of Colombia, which as an emerging democracy, threastens to embolden the resistance within Venezuela. he may well ship some tanks to his ally Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, so that an invasion of Honduras will be possible.
Meanwhile, Russia is a clear and present danger. It is my contention that Putin wants to restore the Russian Empire, and realize the longtime Russian goal of getting a warm water southern port. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, which saw many captive nations break away from Moscow's grip. It is enough that it was a humiliation to a once great power, but strategically , it was a disaster. With Ukraine declaring independence, Russia lost Odessa and Sebastopol, their ports on the Black Sea, which allowed them access to the Mediterreanean via the Dardanelles. They now lease the port from Ukraine, which limits them in terms of how it can be used. They also lost huge coal resources, and excellent farmland. Since the ascension of Putin, the Russians have tried to weaken Ukraine, and even brimg her back into the Russian sphere of influence. Note the interference in the last election, and sponsorship of a pro-Russian candidate, and an attempt to poision Viktor Yushchenko. I believe they will interfere in the next elections, and even more ruthlessly, since they have nothing to fear from "Hello Kitty" (as tammy Bruce calls him) in Washington.
He has been massing troops on the Georgian border fro some time now, and will no doubt find some reason to justify inishing off his grudge match aganst President Mikhail Saakashvili and democracy in that small country.
With Ukraine back under his belt, either as a component of the New Russia, or as a puppet state (like Lukashenko's Belarus) Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, The Baltic States and the Czech Republic will come under pressure.
Poland and the Eastern European nations need to take matters in their own hands. After the First World War, Poland, Ukraine and Lithuania had held talks about establishing a Confedracy such as had existed in times past, which had provided some measure of security, and could have provided a bulwark against both an aggressive germany and Russia. Past wrongs and festering animosities prevented it from happening. the result was Ukaine losing its independence an being absorbed by Russia two years later, whil Pland and lithaunia would only enjoy their independence for 20 years. Such a confedration if tried today could work, and keep Russia in check, But the Czech reoublic, Slovakia Estonia, Latvia and Hungary should also be included. Such an entity/alliance could provide for its own defense, and deter Russia.
Georgia, due to Geography, is in a much more difficult position. Logically they shoul ally themselves with Armenia and Turkey, but the Armenian/turkish animosities still run too deep for common sense to prevail, leaving Georgia out in the cold.
It is also possible that the Russian moves in the Caucasus may well be part of a plan for Russia to move into Iran eventually, should Israel take pre-emptive action against the regime in Teheran and heir nuclear project. Russia would then control even more immense oil resources, and have their long sought after southern port.
By his appeasement policies Obama has sent the wrong signals to the wrong people, which could well result in these rogue powers acting to advance some of their long term aims. If this argument needs any more re-inforcement, Obama has now agreed to hold direct talks with North Korea.... So there WAS a price paid to the pot bellied "Dear Leader" after all...
Will China, which sees Taiwan as a renegade province take it as a green light to finally regain face, and settle that old score?
Barack Obama has exposed the United States, the west, and the emerging free republics in Asia and latin America to danger on all sides, and if any of these scenaros do come to pass, we will find ourselves in the midst of a global war that cannot be won without nukes...and the problem is, the other sides have the bomb too... The countries that truly love their freedom must stand firm, an take their defense into their own hands. It is time to stop relying on the USA.
Barack Hussein Obama has reneged on a US promise to provide Missile defense for Poland and the Czech Republic... Why? To appease the revanchiste Russian regime of Vladimir Putin. And to add insult to injury, he has done it on the 70th anniversary of the Soviet Invasion of Eastern Poland as per the secret protocols of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty.
Though nominally the President, let's make no mistake about it, Dimitri Medvedev doesn't even take a trip to the loo without Putin first signing off on it, and for Obama to believe he can do business with these people is either a demonstration of an appalling ignorance of history, or a deliberate sellout of western security.
Poland has long been a staunch US ally. Now Poland has been betrayed. So what is Poland to do?
It is my view that as long as Obama is president, the United States is no longer to be trusted or counted on. Ask anyone in Honduras.So Poland, and other countries in Eastern central europe must take measures themselves to protect themselves against Russian aggression.
George W. Bush once stated that he " looked the man in the eye. I was able to get a sense of his soul" John McCain, however, got it right when he said " I looked into Putin' eyes and saw three letters: K-G-B".
Like Chamberlain, Barack Obama seems to believe that appeasing rogue governments is the pathway to peace. In 1936, Adolf Hitler first tested the resolve of western powers by marching a hanful of trrops into the Rhineland. he marched the same troops out and then back in again several times, and the west was sufficiently afraid of confrontation that they let him get away with it. Hitler tested them again over Austria, and then Czechoslovakia and was able to size them up as "liitle worms" as he put it. Had they marched into the Rhinelnad and called Hitler's bluff, the Nazi dictator would have , by his own admission, fallen from power. Instead, the result was a major war 3 years later that took tens of millions of lives and left Europe in ruins.
Now Obama is backing down on all the eastern European allies that George Bush stood up for and John McCain would have stood up for. And even more amazing is that he let his guard down just after the Russians agreed to ship weapons and tanks to the Chavez regime in Venezuela, and is cozying up to Iran.
I believe that Barack Hussein Obama is leading us to just such a war. Chavez is buying these Russian weapons, not to "defend" Venezuela, which has no enemies seriously contemplating, let alone capable of invading them, but rather, he will launch an invasion of Colombia, which as an emerging democracy, threastens to embolden the resistance within Venezuela. he may well ship some tanks to his ally Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, so that an invasion of Honduras will be possible.
Meanwhile, Russia is a clear and present danger. It is my contention that Putin wants to restore the Russian Empire, and realize the longtime Russian goal of getting a warm water southern port. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, which saw many captive nations break away from Moscow's grip. It is enough that it was a humiliation to a once great power, but strategically , it was a disaster. With Ukraine declaring independence, Russia lost Odessa and Sebastopol, their ports on the Black Sea, which allowed them access to the Mediterreanean via the Dardanelles. They now lease the port from Ukraine, which limits them in terms of how it can be used. They also lost huge coal resources, and excellent farmland. Since the ascension of Putin, the Russians have tried to weaken Ukraine, and even brimg her back into the Russian sphere of influence. Note the interference in the last election, and sponsorship of a pro-Russian candidate, and an attempt to poision Viktor Yushchenko. I believe they will interfere in the next elections, and even more ruthlessly, since they have nothing to fear from "Hello Kitty" (as tammy Bruce calls him) in Washington.
He has been massing troops on the Georgian border fro some time now, and will no doubt find some reason to justify inishing off his grudge match aganst President Mikhail Saakashvili and democracy in that small country.
With Ukraine back under his belt, either as a component of the New Russia, or as a puppet state (like Lukashenko's Belarus) Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, The Baltic States and the Czech Republic will come under pressure.
Poland and the Eastern European nations need to take matters in their own hands. After the First World War, Poland, Ukraine and Lithuania had held talks about establishing a Confedracy such as had existed in times past, which had provided some measure of security, and could have provided a bulwark against both an aggressive germany and Russia. Past wrongs and festering animosities prevented it from happening. the result was Ukaine losing its independence an being absorbed by Russia two years later, whil Pland and lithaunia would only enjoy their independence for 20 years. Such a confedration if tried today could work, and keep Russia in check, But the Czech reoublic, Slovakia Estonia, Latvia and Hungary should also be included. Such an entity/alliance could provide for its own defense, and deter Russia.
Georgia, due to Geography, is in a much more difficult position. Logically they shoul ally themselves with Armenia and Turkey, but the Armenian/turkish animosities still run too deep for common sense to prevail, leaving Georgia out in the cold.
It is also possible that the Russian moves in the Caucasus may well be part of a plan for Russia to move into Iran eventually, should Israel take pre-emptive action against the regime in Teheran and heir nuclear project. Russia would then control even more immense oil resources, and have their long sought after southern port.
By his appeasement policies Obama has sent the wrong signals to the wrong people, which could well result in these rogue powers acting to advance some of their long term aims. If this argument needs any more re-inforcement, Obama has now agreed to hold direct talks with North Korea.... So there WAS a price paid to the pot bellied "Dear Leader" after all...
Will China, which sees Taiwan as a renegade province take it as a green light to finally regain face, and settle that old score?
Barack Obama has exposed the United States, the west, and the emerging free republics in Asia and latin America to danger on all sides, and if any of these scenaros do come to pass, we will find ourselves in the midst of a global war that cannot be won without nukes...and the problem is, the other sides have the bomb too... The countries that truly love their freedom must stand firm, an take their defense into their own hands. It is time to stop relying on the USA.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Honour Killings: We'd Better Understand
Honour Killings: We'd Better Understand
This girl is in hiding, terrified that she will be a victim of a so-called "Honour Killing". In this video she broke down saying that we don't undrstand. We had better understand that radical Islam does mandate (not permit, but REQUIRES) such extreme action for apostasy, and is often carried out for other things, such as adultery, or even minor matters which bring shame to the family.
Her parents want her returned to them, but she knows they will kill her if she is sent back. She also points out how widespread the practice really is. Here is a recent case that took place in Canada.
We need to wake up here in thewest. As more and more Muslims come to our countries, the demands grow for Sharia law to be permitted alongside our own law in matters pertaining to "internal Muslim affairs". Eventually it will be the law of the land, if concessiona are made. I would notbe surprised if many so-called honour Killings" are covered up by simply telling the authorities that "she has gone back to (insert Islamic country of your choice) to be married. We'll let Fathima Rifqa Bary tell her story and make her plea. The world needs to know, not only that "honour killings take place here, but be made aware of the many that take place every single day in Islamic countries, many of which go unreported, since in those countries where sharia is applied, women are considered second class persons , if that.
This girl is in hiding, terrified that she will be a victim of a so-called "Honour Killing". In this video she broke down saying that we don't undrstand. We had better understand that radical Islam does mandate (not permit, but REQUIRES) such extreme action for apostasy, and is often carried out for other things, such as adultery, or even minor matters which bring shame to the family.
Her parents want her returned to them, but she knows they will kill her if she is sent back. She also points out how widespread the practice really is. Here is a recent case that took place in Canada.
We need to wake up here in thewest. As more and more Muslims come to our countries, the demands grow for Sharia law to be permitted alongside our own law in matters pertaining to "internal Muslim affairs". Eventually it will be the law of the land, if concessiona are made. I would notbe surprised if many so-called honour Killings" are covered up by simply telling the authorities that "she has gone back to (insert Islamic country of your choice) to be married. We'll let Fathima Rifqa Bary tell her story and make her plea. The world needs to know, not only that "honour killings take place here, but be made aware of the many that take place every single day in Islamic countries, many of which go unreported, since in those countries where sharia is applied, women are considered second class persons , if that.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Hilary Clinton's Outbursts: More to this picture than meets the Eye
Given the two recent outbursts from Hilary Clinton it is obvious she is SEETHING over the way her husband upstaged her in NK last week, and moreover, how Obama scored a KO on her with that.
Obama has her as Sec. of State so that he can control her and neutralize the threat of a challenge to his nomination. So sending Bill (Hope he's comfortable in the doghouse) to North Korea instead of insisting that SHE is the sec. of state and Bill was just a private citizen, was an insult to the 100th degree. Obama succeeded in using Bill to undermine her by making her a) look like the "little lady" and b) That a man should be sent to handle a man's job.
So it is certain that she is very upset, probably far more so than when she found out about Monica Lewinsky at the same time as everyone else.
She is tipping her hand about her future, judging by the way she reacted to that question from the Congolese interlocutor, and getting so angry that she thought (due to the poor translation) she was being asked what BILL thought about something.
Article and Video here
Note also that a video featuring a soundbite inimical to the interests of Pelosi,Hoyer and the Obama Administration from HRC in 2003 is now making the rounds, in which she says that dissent is patriotic, not "unamerican"
See Video here
Hell hath no fury like the wrath of a woman scorned. She will be watching the political climate carefully. Note that Obama's poll numbers are worse than Bush's were at thus stage in the presidency (39% STRONGLY disapprove, 28% STRONGLY approve according to Rasmussen) and given the foolishness of just about every Obama policy, the profligate spending, the unfathomable arrogance of the Dems, the circumstances are about right for her to mount a challenge to Obama for the nomination in 2012. Given her age, it would likely be her last realistic kick at the can too.
She will seek a plausible reason that looks principled to break with the Obama regime, probably late this year,early next, and get started on her campaign.
It was reported two weeks ago on Drudge that she has NOT shut down her PAC. More notably, her supporters have helped her retire her debt and raise new funds.
I believe that if HRC was to run again for the Dem nomination, she would win it easily over this puked-up excuse for a president that currently occupies the Oval office. Many DEMOCRATS have realized the horrific mistake they made, in nominating the clueless but silver tongued Obama. I will take it one step further. If the revelations about Edwards had come out a month or two sooner, HRC would have handily won Iowa, and cruised on to the nomination, and I believe, the presidency. Bad as she is, and as strongly as i disagree with her on many issues, I don't think she would be anything close to half as bad as the Village idiot community organizer aka the Teleprompter of the United States (TOTUS).
In any case she emerges a far less formidable foe for the GOP because of the genuine anger rising against Democrats on a generic basis, and also, I believe the all-out internal warfare that will result from Obama's incumbency facing such a serious challenge, further enhanced by bad blood, the Dems will have ripped themselves to shreds, and will NOT unite around the eventual winner, and the result in 2012 will be similar to 1980 when Ted Kennedy challenged Carter and left the Dems bitterly divided. The remaining Obamabots will not support HRC, they'd sooner stay home.Meanwhile the HRC women (aka Sisterhood of Traveling Pantsuits) will not vote for Obama a second time, just for the sake of party unity and having a Democratic presient. (Remember PUMA?)
Thus, I see a real possibility that Americans will turn en masse to Mitt Romney, since Obama's policies will NOT make the economy better, and they will want someone with a proven track record at fixing economic messes, and one with actual executive experience at both the State governorship level, and in the private sector, and even the Olympics.
He will offset the Mormon issue by choosing Huckabee, Pawlenty or Palin for VP.
Obama has her as Sec. of State so that he can control her and neutralize the threat of a challenge to his nomination. So sending Bill (Hope he's comfortable in the doghouse) to North Korea instead of insisting that SHE is the sec. of state and Bill was just a private citizen, was an insult to the 100th degree. Obama succeeded in using Bill to undermine her by making her a) look like the "little lady" and b) That a man should be sent to handle a man's job.
So it is certain that she is very upset, probably far more so than when she found out about Monica Lewinsky at the same time as everyone else.
She is tipping her hand about her future, judging by the way she reacted to that question from the Congolese interlocutor, and getting so angry that she thought (due to the poor translation) she was being asked what BILL thought about something.
Article and Video here
Note also that a video featuring a soundbite inimical to the interests of Pelosi,Hoyer and the Obama Administration from HRC in 2003 is now making the rounds, in which she says that dissent is patriotic, not "unamerican"
See Video here
Hell hath no fury like the wrath of a woman scorned. She will be watching the political climate carefully. Note that Obama's poll numbers are worse than Bush's were at thus stage in the presidency (39% STRONGLY disapprove, 28% STRONGLY approve according to Rasmussen) and given the foolishness of just about every Obama policy, the profligate spending, the unfathomable arrogance of the Dems, the circumstances are about right for her to mount a challenge to Obama for the nomination in 2012. Given her age, it would likely be her last realistic kick at the can too.
She will seek a plausible reason that looks principled to break with the Obama regime, probably late this year,early next, and get started on her campaign.
It was reported two weeks ago on Drudge that she has NOT shut down her PAC. More notably, her supporters have helped her retire her debt and raise new funds.
I believe that if HRC was to run again for the Dem nomination, she would win it easily over this puked-up excuse for a president that currently occupies the Oval office. Many DEMOCRATS have realized the horrific mistake they made, in nominating the clueless but silver tongued Obama. I will take it one step further. If the revelations about Edwards had come out a month or two sooner, HRC would have handily won Iowa, and cruised on to the nomination, and I believe, the presidency. Bad as she is, and as strongly as i disagree with her on many issues, I don't think she would be anything close to half as bad as the Village idiot community organizer aka the Teleprompter of the United States (TOTUS).
In any case she emerges a far less formidable foe for the GOP because of the genuine anger rising against Democrats on a generic basis, and also, I believe the all-out internal warfare that will result from Obama's incumbency facing such a serious challenge, further enhanced by bad blood, the Dems will have ripped themselves to shreds, and will NOT unite around the eventual winner, and the result in 2012 will be similar to 1980 when Ted Kennedy challenged Carter and left the Dems bitterly divided. The remaining Obamabots will not support HRC, they'd sooner stay home.Meanwhile the HRC women (aka Sisterhood of Traveling Pantsuits) will not vote for Obama a second time, just for the sake of party unity and having a Democratic presient. (Remember PUMA?)
Thus, I see a real possibility that Americans will turn en masse to Mitt Romney, since Obama's policies will NOT make the economy better, and they will want someone with a proven track record at fixing economic messes, and one with actual executive experience at both the State governorship level, and in the private sector, and even the Olympics.
He will offset the Mormon issue by choosing Huckabee, Pawlenty or Palin for VP.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Environmentalist Moonbat Al Gore takes off his mask
Al Goresays "US Climate Control Bill will help bring about Global Governance"... Thanks to the voters of his home state of Tennesee who denied him 11 Electoral College votes in 2000 saved us from getting President Al Gore.And to think he was once seen as a Blue Dog Democrat.
Global government is madness. When , not if, but when-best intentions notwithstanding-it slips into totalitarianism, Who will be left to liberate us?
If you want a glimpse at what global government will look like, watch what is going on in the world today: The "world" gangs up on Israel, and tries to impose its collective will there. The "world" rallies around thugs like Hugo Chavez and the "exclusive elite club" members (pretty much everybody but Israel and Taiwan) rush to his side, and try to impose their will on countries like Honduras who dare to follow the rule of law...Watch Taiwan. How long before the global elite sacrifice that freewheeling island democracy to the People's Republic of China?
It will be a tightly controlled world, whereby the elite whom we will be given the privelege of "electing" will impose economic restrictions. They will institute eugenics and population control programs in order to eliminate "useless mouths" to feed. And they will control minds through the media pushing an agenda of extreme social liberalism: promiscuity without commitment, legalized recreational drugs, rampant pornography,gambling (think about the tax revenues!) and mind numbing entertainment from a controlled, sycophantic media. The trends are already apparent, and only through protest and vigilance can we hold them at bay.
And in case you've heard anything to the contrary, Pope Benedict does speak for, but rather AGAINST Global government.
Global government is madness. When , not if, but when-best intentions notwithstanding-it slips into totalitarianism, Who will be left to liberate us?
If you want a glimpse at what global government will look like, watch what is going on in the world today: The "world" gangs up on Israel, and tries to impose its collective will there. The "world" rallies around thugs like Hugo Chavez and the "exclusive elite club" members (pretty much everybody but Israel and Taiwan) rush to his side, and try to impose their will on countries like Honduras who dare to follow the rule of law...Watch Taiwan. How long before the global elite sacrifice that freewheeling island democracy to the People's Republic of China?
It will be a tightly controlled world, whereby the elite whom we will be given the privelege of "electing" will impose economic restrictions. They will institute eugenics and population control programs in order to eliminate "useless mouths" to feed. And they will control minds through the media pushing an agenda of extreme social liberalism: promiscuity without commitment, legalized recreational drugs, rampant pornography,gambling (think about the tax revenues!) and mind numbing entertainment from a controlled, sycophantic media. The trends are already apparent, and only through protest and vigilance can we hold them at bay.
And in case you've heard anything to the contrary, Pope Benedict does speak for, but rather AGAINST Global government.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
"Tell The World What is Happening Here. This is our Revolution! We Will Not give up!"
Shouted one 26 year old engineer in the Streets of Teheran... "We Want Democracy!"
It seems the Iranian people won't let their dream of freedom die.The quoted Engineer was one of Thousands who braved armed revolutionary guards by turning out on the streets of Teheran on Thursday to once again protest the stolen election.
Most worthy of note, is that it seems this has now become a "people power" movement as Mir Hussein Mousavi and other "approved" presidential candidates stayed away from the protests vowing to pursue their complaints through the legal system. Can anyone say "surrender monkey"?
One witness gave this account: “The crowds are too huge to contain. Riot police running up and down Fatemi Street, beating people, barely got out of the way. The crowds just get out of their way and come back.”
Meanwhile, western politicians expressed their "concern". It seems we live in one of those times when our leaders choose political correctness instead of taking a clear stand in favour of those who would like the same freedoms we in the west enjoy.
So, if it is indeed "people power", then we the people need to stand up and show the solidarity that our leaders will not, with the Iranian people.
Please stand with them, and let's help them get their story out, may the death of Neda Agha Sultan and others unnamed not be in vain!
It seems the Iranian people won't let their dream of freedom die.The quoted Engineer was one of Thousands who braved armed revolutionary guards by turning out on the streets of Teheran on Thursday to once again protest the stolen election.
Most worthy of note, is that it seems this has now become a "people power" movement as Mir Hussein Mousavi and other "approved" presidential candidates stayed away from the protests vowing to pursue their complaints through the legal system. Can anyone say "surrender monkey"?
One witness gave this account: “The crowds are too huge to contain. Riot police running up and down Fatemi Street, beating people, barely got out of the way. The crowds just get out of their way and come back.”
Meanwhile, western politicians expressed their "concern". It seems we live in one of those times when our leaders choose political correctness instead of taking a clear stand in favour of those who would like the same freedoms we in the west enjoy.
So, if it is indeed "people power", then we the people need to stand up and show the solidarity that our leaders will not, with the Iranian people.
Please stand with them, and let's help them get their story out, may the death of Neda Agha Sultan and others unnamed not be in vain!
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Canada's Christian Heritage party makes an official statement on Honduras
Here is an official Communique from the Christian Heritage Party of Canada on the situation in Honduras. These guys usually get it right, and they are the one voice, though in the political wilderness crying out for the truth and for justice.
Jim Hnatiuk - Leader of the Christian Heritage Party
Communiqué Vol 16, No 25 July 07, 2009
CHP Canada Speaks Out on Honduras!
In this world of much unrest, with riots in Iran, Honduras and now China, Canada must choose wisely when to speak out and to whom we give our support. Recently our Canadian Government decided to throw its support behind the reinstatement of the Honduran President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales.
Canwest News reported that applause erupted in the General Assembly when officials announced Canada and the U.S. had joined the leftist, and often anti-western, Latin American resolution sponsors, Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela. President Hugo Chavez announced his country was ready to support a "rebellion of the Honduran people." Rarely, if ever, has Canada been in step with these countries. That should have been a clue that something is wrong!
On July 5, the Honduras National Congress communicated to the national and international public that the democratic state of law was repeatedly breached by the citizen José Manuel Zelaya Rosales. Rosales, according to the Honduras National Congress, time and again violated the Constitution of the republic, disavowing expressly and publicly the jurisdiction of the other branches of government.
Our Conservative Government should have maintained a firm position calling for the resumption of the democratic process in Honduras.
As former CHP leader Ron Gray stated, "Canada should take the position that the Honduran courts should be supported and protected -- and closely observed to ensure that they are not sliding into corruption and unconstitutional usurpation of power (like Canada's courts!). But Ottawa should not have leapt to ally us with three communist dictatorships and the naiveté of the American 'narcissist-in-chief'.
The Honduran courts authorized the military to depose Zelaya, which they did; and to install an interim president to finish his term, after which there would be new elections... which they also did. That's not a "coup"! When the courts order a military action, the civilian government is still in control of the military, not the other way around."
Prime Minister Harper appears to be playing "Follow the Leader" -- What's important and what he should be doing is watching closely to ensure that the Honduran courts are acting constitutionally. His advisors, instead of flipping hamburgers this summer should be giving him this good counsel. But then again, if Mr. Harper doesn't recognize, or act, when Canada's courts usurp power unconstitutionally, what authority would he have to speak into another country's judicial crisis?
Jim Hnatiuk - Leader of the Christian Heritage Party
Communiqué Vol 16, No 25 July 07, 2009
CHP Canada Speaks Out on Honduras!
In this world of much unrest, with riots in Iran, Honduras and now China, Canada must choose wisely when to speak out and to whom we give our support. Recently our Canadian Government decided to throw its support behind the reinstatement of the Honduran President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales.
Canwest News reported that applause erupted in the General Assembly when officials announced Canada and the U.S. had joined the leftist, and often anti-western, Latin American resolution sponsors, Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela. President Hugo Chavez announced his country was ready to support a "rebellion of the Honduran people." Rarely, if ever, has Canada been in step with these countries. That should have been a clue that something is wrong!
On July 5, the Honduras National Congress communicated to the national and international public that the democratic state of law was repeatedly breached by the citizen José Manuel Zelaya Rosales. Rosales, according to the Honduras National Congress, time and again violated the Constitution of the republic, disavowing expressly and publicly the jurisdiction of the other branches of government.
Our Conservative Government should have maintained a firm position calling for the resumption of the democratic process in Honduras.
As former CHP leader Ron Gray stated, "Canada should take the position that the Honduran courts should be supported and protected -- and closely observed to ensure that they are not sliding into corruption and unconstitutional usurpation of power (like Canada's courts!). But Ottawa should not have leapt to ally us with three communist dictatorships and the naiveté of the American 'narcissist-in-chief'.
The Honduran courts authorized the military to depose Zelaya, which they did; and to install an interim president to finish his term, after which there would be new elections... which they also did. That's not a "coup"! When the courts order a military action, the civilian government is still in control of the military, not the other way around."
Prime Minister Harper appears to be playing "Follow the Leader" -- What's important and what he should be doing is watching closely to ensure that the Honduran courts are acting constitutionally. His advisors, instead of flipping hamburgers this summer should be giving him this good counsel. But then again, if Mr. Harper doesn't recognize, or act, when Canada's courts usurp power unconstitutionally, what authority would he have to speak into another country's judicial crisis?
While No one Was looking.....
Tyrants moved to consolidate their positions, at the expense of human fredom and dignity.
A celebrity-idol worshipping country electes a celebrity president with no
qualifications but a an oratory and a supermodel fashion plate wife that
gives a dumbed down population the "warm and fuzzies" as they are led down the garden path to their doom. Such is the legacy of MTV, and so-called reality shows.
The Michael Jackson three ring circus to take place today is evidence of
this idol worship.
The media has become almost all Jacko all the time. The Mullahs in Iran knew
this and used the opportunity to mop up what could have been their undoing.
And Mr celebrity president aided and abetted them by winking at Ahmedinejad
for 10 days instead of expressing soldiarity with the freedom fighters. Neda Agha Sultan apparently has died in vain, as the media frenzy over a dead drug addicted popstar has pushed her into the proverbial "memory hole", and along with her, the Iranian people'shopes for a modicum of reform, and freedom.
And now because of the village idiot with "the look" Israel , a country that
still lives in the real world will have to take action and risk war and
casualties which might have been avoided had the Mullahs fallen.
While the United States and the western world gazes at its Jacksonite navel, the ChiComs are coming down with brutal force on its Uighur population in Xinjiang province. They have been waiting for just such a time as this to subdue the uighurs while nobody is paying attention. The Obama administration remains silent, as the Bush administrion did before it when it comes to human rights abuses by the ChiComs.Stephen Harper's Conservative government in Canada, has to its credit, spoken out consistently against Chinese communist human rights abuses, though they are on the wrong side of things in Honduras.
Yet with all this going on in the world that require immediate attention, the media drones on about the Michael Jackson memorial and anything else it can dredge up about the idol, and from what I can tell the people are eating it up while tyrants consolidate their positions.
A celebrity-idol worshipping country electes a celebrity president with no
qualifications but a an oratory and a supermodel fashion plate wife that
gives a dumbed down population the "warm and fuzzies" as they are led down the garden path to their doom. Such is the legacy of MTV, and so-called reality shows.
The Michael Jackson three ring circus to take place today is evidence of
this idol worship.
The media has become almost all Jacko all the time. The Mullahs in Iran knew
this and used the opportunity to mop up what could have been their undoing.
And Mr celebrity president aided and abetted them by winking at Ahmedinejad
for 10 days instead of expressing soldiarity with the freedom fighters. Neda Agha Sultan apparently has died in vain, as the media frenzy over a dead drug addicted popstar has pushed her into the proverbial "memory hole", and along with her, the Iranian people'shopes for a modicum of reform, and freedom.
And now because of the village idiot with "the look" Israel , a country that
still lives in the real world will have to take action and risk war and
casualties which might have been avoided had the Mullahs fallen.
While the United States and the western world gazes at its Jacksonite navel, the ChiComs are coming down with brutal force on its Uighur population in Xinjiang province. They have been waiting for just such a time as this to subdue the uighurs while nobody is paying attention. The Obama administration remains silent, as the Bush administrion did before it when it comes to human rights abuses by the ChiComs.Stephen Harper's Conservative government in Canada, has to its credit, spoken out consistently against Chinese communist human rights abuses, though they are on the wrong side of things in Honduras.
Yet with all this going on in the world that require immediate attention, the media drones on about the Michael Jackson memorial and anything else it can dredge up about the idol, and from what I can tell the people are eating it up while tyrants consolidate their positions.
The Truth laces up its Boots
It has been said that a lie can get all around the world while the truth is still lacing up its boots. Let the world be served notice that Truth has laced its boots, and is going to start kicking some tail.
Here is the English traslation of the article from Laura Miranda-Flefil and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro, who penned this article in Spanish which i linked to last weekend. If you are more about truth than political correctness, read the article, and let your government officials know that they should not be siding with Hugo Chavez and company.
----------------
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
Who Perpetrated a Coup in Honduras?
July 2nd, 2009
What is a Coup?
A coup is the toppling of a legally constituted power by a person invested with authority in an
illegal and utterly brutal fashion. It has two distinct characteristics. The First is the breaking of
the Constitutional and/or legal order of a State of Law. The Second is the continued use of force
to perpetuate oneself in power.
What are the origins of this term?
The history behind the word Coup takes us to XVIII century France. Originally a “Coup d’État”
referred to the illegal, sudden and repressive measures that the King would take against his
enemies. Nowadays we call this autocoup and it is characterized by the flagrant disregard for
law, especially when that illegality is in conflict with the legal mandates of another power. The
violator becomes then the usurper power.
In the XIX century, history introduces the use of the armed forces to head the taking of power to
stay in power. Many of these coups where supported by a sector of civilians, but did not
necessarily need of their presence. The armed forces were the ones to organize these coups.
Curzio Malaparte and Samuel Finer were the ones to finish conceptualizing the term we are
studying. Malaparte comments that the use of surprise and the scarce duration of the operation
to ascend to power are essential. Finer stated that the use of force, violence or the threat of
violence is used to replace or direct the government.
If it walks like a Duck, Looks like a Duck, QUACKS like a Duck, it is a…
The question that emerges is, whether the actions that were to take place on Sunday June 28th of
2009 constitute a Survey or a Consultation of the Populace? To answer it in a legal manner we
have to look back to our juridical roots. We will start by defining both terms. Then we will
analyze what was intended by this “question”, the impact of which some have attempted to
minimize.
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
Survey, according to Professor Garcia Ferrado, is “an investigation that is done on a sample of
subjects representative of a broader collective, using standardized procedures of interrogation
with the intent of obtaining from the population quantitative measures of a great variety of
subjective and objective characteristics.” Sierra Bravo expresses that there are four fundamental
characteristics that a survey has. These characteristics are: a) a survey is an indirect observation
of the facts by the means of what the interested manifest; b) it is a prepared method with an
investigative end; c) it’s extension is over the whole of the studied population (a classroom,
clients in a store, habitants of a state, etc) as a representative sample, without taking into
consideration nationality or residency of a person; d) subjective aspects of members of a society
are displayed with surveys. A survey can be taken in an oral or written manner. In simple
terms, a survey is the study of any social phenomenon that has generally occurred or is
occurring, to know the reality on certain subjects, such as the quality of educational or
healthcare services, the proliferation of crime, the economical status, habits, how one spends
free time, the liking to a certain climactic temperature, etc. An example of a survey is the one
Gallup recently took of a sample group of the population of the United States of America, where
by phone, they asked what economic problems they faced, answers given freely ranged from
unemployment, high cost of healthcare and high cost of education.
Consultation of the Populace, according to Espasa Calpe, is “to get the populations opinion on a
national transcendental subject.” Cardenas Lopez illustrates us by stating that it is a
“mechanism of citizen participation by which the people are called to decide on a matter of vital
importance.” It is also known as referendum, plebiscite, ballot question or citizen ballot. Its
own nature defines it as a direct vote where only the electoral body of a state has the ability to
participate. It necessarily needs to be written on a legally sanctioned ballot and deposited in a
legally sanctioned ballot box. The questions are answered with a yes or a no. An example of a
Consultation of the Populace is the one held in Ecuador last September 28th of 2008, that asked a
question that read as follows: Do you approve that a National Assembly is called for and
installed, with the full powers according to the Electoral Statutes that are annexed, to transform
the institutional frame of the State and elaborate a new Constitution?
Do you agree that in the general elections of November of 2009 a fourth ballot box be installed
so that a National Constituent Assembly that approves a political Constitution? This was the
question to be answered in the election of Sunday June 28th of 2009. To answer it you had to
credit your citizenship by presenting a means of identification such as the state issued ID Card.
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
The answer was placed on a ballot that had 2 options, one for yes or a no. The ballot was
deposited in a ballot box.
This is not an election. All actions that were to take place this given Sunday constitute a
Consultation of the Populace.
Can the Constitution of Honduras be reformed without the formation of a Constitutional
National Assembly?
Yes.
The Constitution has a specific mechanism by which it admits reforms to its body. Article 373 of
Title VII: Of the Reformation and the Inviolability of the Constitution of the Republic, states:
“The reformation of this Constitution can be decreed by the National Congress, in ordinary
session, by two thirds of the totality of the votes of its members. The decree will state the article
or articles it will reform and must be ratified by the subsequent ordinary legislature, by the
same number of votes, to be valid.”
And what of the Petrous Articles?
What are the Petrous Articles?
Petrous articles are those that according to the Constitution can’t suffer reforms, be abolished or
changed in any way. These articles are intangible and can’t be reformed. Their characteristics
are given to them by Constitutional Article 374 and it is a limit imposed to the reformatory
ability of Congress by the Constituent Assembly, subtracting the faculty to revise that
Parliament has. In that same line, article 5 of the Primary Law restricts their reform through a
Consultation of the Populace.
Why are Petrous Articles important?
Petrous articles are historical importance to the Honduran nation. The Constitution of
Honduras has been enforced since January 20th of 1982. This is the longest running Constitution
of our country. This Primary Law put an end to a long period of great crisis. It was
characterized by decades of military coups and presidents that perpetrated themselves in
power, one of whom stayed in power for 16 years. Petrous Articles were designed to protect
Honduras from this ill-fated past and guarantee a stable and democratic future.
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
Which are the Petrous Articles?
A lot is said of these Petrous Articles, but very few times are these stated clearly. This analysis
we developed will expose in the language of the Constitution what these articles are. According
to article 374, “under no circumstances can the reformation of the following take place:
the previous article” – the already mentioned 373, that establishes the way the
Constitution can be reformed
the present article” – that establishes the quality of Petrous
articles that refer to…:
o the form of government” – article 4
o the national territory” – articles 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 y 14
o the presidential period” (4 years) – article 237
o to the prohibition of being reelected President of the Republic, to any citizen who
has ever held this office under any title” (prohibition of being reelected) – articles
4 and 239
o the one that refers to who cannot be President of the Republic for the subsequent
period” – article 240
What does the existence of Petrous Articles mean when it comes to the Consultation of the Populace?
The Constitution can be reformed for the exception of Petrous Articles. The Consultation of the
Populace that was intended wanted to change all the Constitution. This turns it into an
Unconstitutional action, in other words contrary to what the Constitution states.
Do the Plebiscite and Referendum exist in Honduran Law?
Yes.
Article 5 of the Constitution of the Republic, in its second paragraph, institutes the referendum
and plebiscite as mechanisms of Consultation of the Populace for matters of fundamental
importance on a national level. The desired effect of these is the strengthening and functionality
of participative democracy, guaranteed in the first paragraph of the mentioned article.
This article didn’t originally count with these mechanisms. Utilizing the constitutional method
of reform, which we previously stated, paragraphs 2-11 were included. Its modification
happened through decree 242-2003 and its ratification through decree 177-2004.
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
Reformed article 5 includes two specifications that are of vital importance when it comes to the
Consultation of the Populace that was intended. First and already stipulated, it forbids the
reformation of the petrous articles. Second, it establishes that only the Supreme Electoral
Tribunal can summon, organize and direct the Consultation of the Populace. Both of these were
violated with the illegal Consultation that the Executive Branch intended on Sunday June 28th of
this year.
How did the Constitutionally Instituted Authorities Defend the Country against these
Illegalities?
The Battle for Democracy Begins
The State Prosecutor’s office started an action before the Administrative Law Tribunal to have
the intended Consultation of the Populace declared illegal and null. By law, the Attorney
General of the Republic had to answer the action, who in doing so stated that the Consultation
of the Populace was Unconstitutional and Illegal. The Tribunal declared that the actions to take
place were illegal and that any activities done to execute said action are by their nature illegal.
Not content the Executive Branch put a team of lawyers to work and appealed the ruling and
tried to render the Attorney General unfit to represent the State, publicly accusing her of being a
traitor. The Court of Appeals confirmed the ruling. Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya
Rosales, his aides and members of his state cabinet did not respect the mandate and keep up
their rhetoric of insults to the legal institutions and their officials.
The Next Chapter
Studying the case, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal united in the legal opposition of the
Consultation of the Populace. First it ordered that all publicity in favor of the commonly known
“Fourth Ballot Box” be suspended, as it found that in all the written, televised and transmitted
publicity contained the stamp and approval of the Tribunal, something that was never
petitioned, approved or authorized. Then the Tribunal declared the Consultation to be illegal,
because it considered that it violated article 5 of the Constitution of the Republic, 15 of the
Electoral Law and of the Political Organizations and other legislation applicable to the case. On
this last resolution, it asked the State Prosecutor’s office to impound any and all material that
was being used for the Consultation of the Populace, as it was deemed illegal. With the
Prosecutors present, the Tribunal impounded the materials and deposited them to be in custody
in the Air Base located in Toncontin. Again, Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales, his
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
aides and members of his state cabinet ignored both resolutions, infringing them and
proceeding with the activities leading to the Consultation of the Populace.
How did the Executive Branch react?
The response of the Executive Branch was to engage in a series of irregular, not mention
unlawful, actions. First, it started by saying that the decree that gave life to the Consultation of
the Populace had not been published, stating that nobody could start any legal action against
the “Fourth Ballot Box” or declare it illegal, despite the fact that activities were being done to see
it through. These activities included but were not limited to: continuous publicity in favor of the
illegal act, design and printing of ballots and ballot boxes and declarations made in official radio
and televised national announcements given by Former President Zelaya to concentrate all
activities of his state cabinet and their resources to the intended end, to ensure that the illegal
election took place. As we’ve said before, he didn’t abide by the judicial rulings and he then
begun personal attacks against the constitutional institutions.
Enter the Armed Forces
The Executive Branch said that the Armed Forces would distribute and protect the ballot boxes
for the Consultation of the Populace. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff started giving
declarations expressing his desire to follow through with the orders of his Commander in Chief
but that there are constitutional dispositions that did not allow him to. The Mass Media
reported on Wednesday June 24th of 2009, just 4 days before the illegal Consultation of the
Populace, that General Romeo Vasquez Velasquez was called to attend to the Presidential
Palace. After a long wait, in an official radio and televised national announcement, Former
President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales announced the dismissal of the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff General Vasquez for rejecting the illegal order to distribute the illegal material
and guard the illegal ballot boxes. This national hero acted in accordance with the rule of law,
due to the fact that constitutional article 278 stated that orders given by the President must be
based on the principles of legality, discipline and military professionalism.
Enter the National Congress and the Constitutional Room of the Supreme Court of Justice
The illegal dismissal of this man of honor, the State Prosecutor’s office and a private defender
separately interposed writs before the Constitutional Room. In admitting it, the Constitutional
Room also suspended the act in question. In simple terms this means that they provisionally
restituted General Romeo Vasquez Velasquez to his post while investigations are pending,
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
warning Former President Zelaya that if he didn’t abide by this resolution he would incur in
civil, administrative and criminal responsibilities. The National Congress disapproved the acts
of the Executive Branch and reinstated the Chairman to his post utilizing numeral 20 of article
205 of the Primary Law.
The Answer of the Executive Branch
To these new determinations the manner in which the Executive Branch acted was astonishing
to say the least. Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales gave a speech in which he incited the population to
rebel and he called them to gather in the Presidential Palace, the Mayan Temple. In this speech
he went so far as to call the Supreme Court of Justice the Supreme Court of Injustice and said he
had never signed the order of dismissal, even though as we mentioned he made it public in a
official radio and televised national announcement and had said it verbally to General Vasquez
Velasquez. Having some 250 followers, he provided buses to them and with them and some
members of his cabinet, Former President Zelaya Rosales headed towards the Air Base in
Toncontin. All of them stormed the Base and extracted all the illegal material of the
Consultation of the Populace.
What should the Executive Branch have been doing?
All of this was being done while the country had terribly pressing issues that the Executive
Branch didn’t recognize or tend to. One of them consisted of the effects left in Honduras by an
earthquake off its Atlantic Coast, which had a magnitude of 7.3 in the Richter Scale and
aftershocks of a magnitude of more than 4 on the same scale, leaving 7 fatalities and losses in
the millions of public and private infrastructure. Another problem Honduras faces was the lack
of identification, detention and prevention of the more than 180 confirmed cases of the N1H1
virus.
The Honduran Society Unites
While all this was happening, political, religious and civil movements where joining forces and
protesting against the commonly known “Fourth Ballot Box.” Exercising the constitutional
rights and guarantees of freedom of association and freedom of expression, they started to
publicize communiqués, make radio and televised announcements, and protested and marched
against the lack of respect demonstrated by the Executive Branch to the Constitution. New
movements were created, like the Generation 4 Change (Generacion X Cambio), Democratic
Civic Union (Union Civica Democratica) and the Honduran Allegiance for Peace and
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
Democracy (Alianza Hondureña por la Paz y la Democracia). Prestigious institutions joined in
the protest, like the Human Rights Commission, the Catholic Church and different Evangelical
Churches.
Never before in the history of this nation had people from different social status, educational
levels, color of skin, political thoughts, religious followings and even hereditary roots joined
together for one cause. Movements based on common ideals, character, democracy and peace
where the characteristics of those of us who joined the noble and exemplary cause. The finality
it had: to respect the Constitution and the laws of Honduras.
The way these manifestations for democracy took and take place stand out. Some used humor,
with protesters dressing with a cowboy hat and using mustaches like the one Former President
Zelaya uses. Others using a white shirt as they proudly held the Honduran Flag in their hands.
Incredibly no acts of vandalism, something seen on a daily basis in the country, have been
registered within the movements and their manifestations; there is no violence, there are no
weapons, public and private buildings are not defaced and even green areas are respected.
Measures taken to Counter these Unconstitutional and Illegal Actions
The answer came in 2 different ways. The National Congress and the State Prosecutor’s Office
acted. Both based their actions within the Honduran Constitution and Honduran Laws.
The National Congress of the Republic disapproved the illegal conduct and separated Jose
Manuel Zelaya Rosales from his office of Constitutional President of the Republic of Honduras,
and named Roberto Micheletti Bain to the post of Constitutional President. The decision was
based on various constitutional and legal mandates. Applying article 321, that expresses that
servers of the State don’t have faculties other than those legally conferred to them, that acts
done outside of law are null and that those acts carry liability, responsibility was deduced for
the illegalities Zelaya Rosales committed. They took into consideration the reiterated violations
of the Constitution of the Republic and the laws of Honduras and the non observation of
resolutions and rulings of the courts and tribunals. They also considered the fact that Zelaya
rendered the legal promise according to article 322 of the Primary Law when he took office and
that according to article 245 of the Constitution the President has the attribution of abiding by
and making others abide by the Constitution, treaties and conventions, laws and other legal
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
dispositions. Following constitutional article 242, that prescribes order of succession, and taking
into account that the Vice President of Honduras quit his office a few months ago, the office of
Constitutional President belonged to the President of the National Congress. In summation, the
Constitutional President of the Republic of Honduras is Roberto Micheletti Bain, until the
constitutional period ends on January 27th of 2010.
The State Prosecutor’s Office has presented and will continue to present Prosecutor’s Demands
before the competent legal authorities against the violators of the laws. In the specific case of
Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales, the actions have already started taking their due
course and warrants for his arrest exist for 18 criminal acts. The crimes he is accused of are
Treason, Corruption, Abuse of Authority and Violations of the Duties of Officials. One can find
these crimes detailed in articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution and 302-311 and 349-357 of the Penal
Code, among others. The criminal acts for which he is being processed include: extending the
period of service of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff by 3 years, note sanctioning or
vetoing 80 laws approved by the National Congress, blocking the transfer of funds to the Office
of the Municipal Mayor of the Central District, only transferring 5 million Lempiras of the 700
million owed to Mayor Offices on a national level, not transferring funds to the National
Congress, not presenting the annual budget to the National Congress for its approval – which
by the final days of June 2009 he hadn’t done and he had to have rendered it by September of
2008, extraordinary annual postings of certain executive offices, qualifying the decisions of the
Supreme Court of Justice and the State Prosecutor’s Office as political, alluding that the
National Congress acted immorally when they emitted the Law of Plebiscite and Referendum,
declaring that the Law of Plebiscite and Referendum was a lie, trying to install illegal ballot
boxes, not suspending publicity of the “Fourth Ballot Box”, destine state funds for the “Fourth
Ballot Box”, publicly exposing a minor that was infected with the N1H1 virus and the dismissal
of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
June 28th of 2009
A lot is speculated and very few can be legally stated, with the merited evidence, of what really
happened on the early hours of June 28th of 2009. What we can establish is the facts that both
sides have accepted. First of all, Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales is alive. His
detention was due to a court order that emanated from the corresponding Penal Court on June
26th of 2006, executed by the Armed Forces and who in consideration of the investiture of
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
President he once had, and to safeguard his safety, he was transported to a different country. It
has been established that Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales left the country on the
Presidential Plane. It is known that he landed in an airport in Costa Rica and he went to stay in
a hotel in San Jose. Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales enjoys personal freedom, as
evidenced by his statements given to international press, his various trips around the continent,
his public appearances and participations before the Organization of American States, the
General Assembly of the United Nations, with regional presidents and world officials.
Conclusion
In Honduras a consolidated democracy exists. We want to add that all of the institutions we
spoke of remain intact. None of these institutions suffered an illegal change of its officials
before, during and after the presidential succession, with no military personnel taking any of
these institutions. No law has been changed, reformed or repealed. There are no special laws in
place. Most importantly the Constitutional Order has not been broken.
Having analyzed the facts of the situation that is being lived in Honduras, from the legal
standpoint, we can categorically state that the usurper government was the one presided by
Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales. We base this assessment on the flagrant disregard for the
Constitution and the Laws of Honduras, creating precarious economical, political and social
situations. The way in which the Republics Institutions have acted are based on the rule of law
and look to respect and safeguard democracy, maintain order and social peace. The question is
left to the reader… WHO PERPETRATED THE COUP?
* Laura Miranda-Flefil is a Lawyer, Candidate for a Masters Degree in Corporate Law and Candidate for a Masters in
International Relations and Foreign Commerce
* Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro is a Lawyer and a Candidate for a Masters in Economy and Law of Corporations (Italy)
**This document was translated by Laura Miranda-Flefil, Original Document: Spanish
Here is the English traslation of the article from Laura Miranda-Flefil and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro, who penned this article in Spanish which i linked to last weekend. If you are more about truth than political correctness, read the article, and let your government officials know that they should not be siding with Hugo Chavez and company.
----------------
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
Who Perpetrated a Coup in Honduras?
July 2nd, 2009
What is a Coup?
A coup is the toppling of a legally constituted power by a person invested with authority in an
illegal and utterly brutal fashion. It has two distinct characteristics. The First is the breaking of
the Constitutional and/or legal order of a State of Law. The Second is the continued use of force
to perpetuate oneself in power.
What are the origins of this term?
The history behind the word Coup takes us to XVIII century France. Originally a “Coup d’État”
referred to the illegal, sudden and repressive measures that the King would take against his
enemies. Nowadays we call this autocoup and it is characterized by the flagrant disregard for
law, especially when that illegality is in conflict with the legal mandates of another power. The
violator becomes then the usurper power.
In the XIX century, history introduces the use of the armed forces to head the taking of power to
stay in power. Many of these coups where supported by a sector of civilians, but did not
necessarily need of their presence. The armed forces were the ones to organize these coups.
Curzio Malaparte and Samuel Finer were the ones to finish conceptualizing the term we are
studying. Malaparte comments that the use of surprise and the scarce duration of the operation
to ascend to power are essential. Finer stated that the use of force, violence or the threat of
violence is used to replace or direct the government.
If it walks like a Duck, Looks like a Duck, QUACKS like a Duck, it is a…
The question that emerges is, whether the actions that were to take place on Sunday June 28th of
2009 constitute a Survey or a Consultation of the Populace? To answer it in a legal manner we
have to look back to our juridical roots. We will start by defining both terms. Then we will
analyze what was intended by this “question”, the impact of which some have attempted to
minimize.
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
Survey, according to Professor Garcia Ferrado, is “an investigation that is done on a sample of
subjects representative of a broader collective, using standardized procedures of interrogation
with the intent of obtaining from the population quantitative measures of a great variety of
subjective and objective characteristics.” Sierra Bravo expresses that there are four fundamental
characteristics that a survey has. These characteristics are: a) a survey is an indirect observation
of the facts by the means of what the interested manifest; b) it is a prepared method with an
investigative end; c) it’s extension is over the whole of the studied population (a classroom,
clients in a store, habitants of a state, etc) as a representative sample, without taking into
consideration nationality or residency of a person; d) subjective aspects of members of a society
are displayed with surveys. A survey can be taken in an oral or written manner. In simple
terms, a survey is the study of any social phenomenon that has generally occurred or is
occurring, to know the reality on certain subjects, such as the quality of educational or
healthcare services, the proliferation of crime, the economical status, habits, how one spends
free time, the liking to a certain climactic temperature, etc. An example of a survey is the one
Gallup recently took of a sample group of the population of the United States of America, where
by phone, they asked what economic problems they faced, answers given freely ranged from
unemployment, high cost of healthcare and high cost of education.
Consultation of the Populace, according to Espasa Calpe, is “to get the populations opinion on a
national transcendental subject.” Cardenas Lopez illustrates us by stating that it is a
“mechanism of citizen participation by which the people are called to decide on a matter of vital
importance.” It is also known as referendum, plebiscite, ballot question or citizen ballot. Its
own nature defines it as a direct vote where only the electoral body of a state has the ability to
participate. It necessarily needs to be written on a legally sanctioned ballot and deposited in a
legally sanctioned ballot box. The questions are answered with a yes or a no. An example of a
Consultation of the Populace is the one held in Ecuador last September 28th of 2008, that asked a
question that read as follows: Do you approve that a National Assembly is called for and
installed, with the full powers according to the Electoral Statutes that are annexed, to transform
the institutional frame of the State and elaborate a new Constitution?
Do you agree that in the general elections of November of 2009 a fourth ballot box be installed
so that a National Constituent Assembly that approves a political Constitution? This was the
question to be answered in the election of Sunday June 28th of 2009. To answer it you had to
credit your citizenship by presenting a means of identification such as the state issued ID Card.
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
The answer was placed on a ballot that had 2 options, one for yes or a no. The ballot was
deposited in a ballot box.
This is not an election. All actions that were to take place this given Sunday constitute a
Consultation of the Populace.
Can the Constitution of Honduras be reformed without the formation of a Constitutional
National Assembly?
Yes.
The Constitution has a specific mechanism by which it admits reforms to its body. Article 373 of
Title VII: Of the Reformation and the Inviolability of the Constitution of the Republic, states:
“The reformation of this Constitution can be decreed by the National Congress, in ordinary
session, by two thirds of the totality of the votes of its members. The decree will state the article
or articles it will reform and must be ratified by the subsequent ordinary legislature, by the
same number of votes, to be valid.”
And what of the Petrous Articles?
What are the Petrous Articles?
Petrous articles are those that according to the Constitution can’t suffer reforms, be abolished or
changed in any way. These articles are intangible and can’t be reformed. Their characteristics
are given to them by Constitutional Article 374 and it is a limit imposed to the reformatory
ability of Congress by the Constituent Assembly, subtracting the faculty to revise that
Parliament has. In that same line, article 5 of the Primary Law restricts their reform through a
Consultation of the Populace.
Why are Petrous Articles important?
Petrous articles are historical importance to the Honduran nation. The Constitution of
Honduras has been enforced since January 20th of 1982. This is the longest running Constitution
of our country. This Primary Law put an end to a long period of great crisis. It was
characterized by decades of military coups and presidents that perpetrated themselves in
power, one of whom stayed in power for 16 years. Petrous Articles were designed to protect
Honduras from this ill-fated past and guarantee a stable and democratic future.
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
Which are the Petrous Articles?
A lot is said of these Petrous Articles, but very few times are these stated clearly. This analysis
we developed will expose in the language of the Constitution what these articles are. According
to article 374, “under no circumstances can the reformation of the following take place:
the previous article” – the already mentioned 373, that establishes the way the
Constitution can be reformed
the present article” – that establishes the quality of Petrous
articles that refer to…:
o the form of government” – article 4
o the national territory” – articles 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 y 14
o the presidential period” (4 years) – article 237
o to the prohibition of being reelected President of the Republic, to any citizen who
has ever held this office under any title” (prohibition of being reelected) – articles
4 and 239
o the one that refers to who cannot be President of the Republic for the subsequent
period” – article 240
What does the existence of Petrous Articles mean when it comes to the Consultation of the Populace?
The Constitution can be reformed for the exception of Petrous Articles. The Consultation of the
Populace that was intended wanted to change all the Constitution. This turns it into an
Unconstitutional action, in other words contrary to what the Constitution states.
Do the Plebiscite and Referendum exist in Honduran Law?
Yes.
Article 5 of the Constitution of the Republic, in its second paragraph, institutes the referendum
and plebiscite as mechanisms of Consultation of the Populace for matters of fundamental
importance on a national level. The desired effect of these is the strengthening and functionality
of participative democracy, guaranteed in the first paragraph of the mentioned article.
This article didn’t originally count with these mechanisms. Utilizing the constitutional method
of reform, which we previously stated, paragraphs 2-11 were included. Its modification
happened through decree 242-2003 and its ratification through decree 177-2004.
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
Reformed article 5 includes two specifications that are of vital importance when it comes to the
Consultation of the Populace that was intended. First and already stipulated, it forbids the
reformation of the petrous articles. Second, it establishes that only the Supreme Electoral
Tribunal can summon, organize and direct the Consultation of the Populace. Both of these were
violated with the illegal Consultation that the Executive Branch intended on Sunday June 28th of
this year.
How did the Constitutionally Instituted Authorities Defend the Country against these
Illegalities?
The Battle for Democracy Begins
The State Prosecutor’s office started an action before the Administrative Law Tribunal to have
the intended Consultation of the Populace declared illegal and null. By law, the Attorney
General of the Republic had to answer the action, who in doing so stated that the Consultation
of the Populace was Unconstitutional and Illegal. The Tribunal declared that the actions to take
place were illegal and that any activities done to execute said action are by their nature illegal.
Not content the Executive Branch put a team of lawyers to work and appealed the ruling and
tried to render the Attorney General unfit to represent the State, publicly accusing her of being a
traitor. The Court of Appeals confirmed the ruling. Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya
Rosales, his aides and members of his state cabinet did not respect the mandate and keep up
their rhetoric of insults to the legal institutions and their officials.
The Next Chapter
Studying the case, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal united in the legal opposition of the
Consultation of the Populace. First it ordered that all publicity in favor of the commonly known
“Fourth Ballot Box” be suspended, as it found that in all the written, televised and transmitted
publicity contained the stamp and approval of the Tribunal, something that was never
petitioned, approved or authorized. Then the Tribunal declared the Consultation to be illegal,
because it considered that it violated article 5 of the Constitution of the Republic, 15 of the
Electoral Law and of the Political Organizations and other legislation applicable to the case. On
this last resolution, it asked the State Prosecutor’s office to impound any and all material that
was being used for the Consultation of the Populace, as it was deemed illegal. With the
Prosecutors present, the Tribunal impounded the materials and deposited them to be in custody
in the Air Base located in Toncontin. Again, Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales, his
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
aides and members of his state cabinet ignored both resolutions, infringing them and
proceeding with the activities leading to the Consultation of the Populace.
How did the Executive Branch react?
The response of the Executive Branch was to engage in a series of irregular, not mention
unlawful, actions. First, it started by saying that the decree that gave life to the Consultation of
the Populace had not been published, stating that nobody could start any legal action against
the “Fourth Ballot Box” or declare it illegal, despite the fact that activities were being done to see
it through. These activities included but were not limited to: continuous publicity in favor of the
illegal act, design and printing of ballots and ballot boxes and declarations made in official radio
and televised national announcements given by Former President Zelaya to concentrate all
activities of his state cabinet and their resources to the intended end, to ensure that the illegal
election took place. As we’ve said before, he didn’t abide by the judicial rulings and he then
begun personal attacks against the constitutional institutions.
Enter the Armed Forces
The Executive Branch said that the Armed Forces would distribute and protect the ballot boxes
for the Consultation of the Populace. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff started giving
declarations expressing his desire to follow through with the orders of his Commander in Chief
but that there are constitutional dispositions that did not allow him to. The Mass Media
reported on Wednesday June 24th of 2009, just 4 days before the illegal Consultation of the
Populace, that General Romeo Vasquez Velasquez was called to attend to the Presidential
Palace. After a long wait, in an official radio and televised national announcement, Former
President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales announced the dismissal of the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff General Vasquez for rejecting the illegal order to distribute the illegal material
and guard the illegal ballot boxes. This national hero acted in accordance with the rule of law,
due to the fact that constitutional article 278 stated that orders given by the President must be
based on the principles of legality, discipline and military professionalism.
Enter the National Congress and the Constitutional Room of the Supreme Court of Justice
The illegal dismissal of this man of honor, the State Prosecutor’s office and a private defender
separately interposed writs before the Constitutional Room. In admitting it, the Constitutional
Room also suspended the act in question. In simple terms this means that they provisionally
restituted General Romeo Vasquez Velasquez to his post while investigations are pending,
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
warning Former President Zelaya that if he didn’t abide by this resolution he would incur in
civil, administrative and criminal responsibilities. The National Congress disapproved the acts
of the Executive Branch and reinstated the Chairman to his post utilizing numeral 20 of article
205 of the Primary Law.
The Answer of the Executive Branch
To these new determinations the manner in which the Executive Branch acted was astonishing
to say the least. Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales gave a speech in which he incited the population to
rebel and he called them to gather in the Presidential Palace, the Mayan Temple. In this speech
he went so far as to call the Supreme Court of Justice the Supreme Court of Injustice and said he
had never signed the order of dismissal, even though as we mentioned he made it public in a
official radio and televised national announcement and had said it verbally to General Vasquez
Velasquez. Having some 250 followers, he provided buses to them and with them and some
members of his cabinet, Former President Zelaya Rosales headed towards the Air Base in
Toncontin. All of them stormed the Base and extracted all the illegal material of the
Consultation of the Populace.
What should the Executive Branch have been doing?
All of this was being done while the country had terribly pressing issues that the Executive
Branch didn’t recognize or tend to. One of them consisted of the effects left in Honduras by an
earthquake off its Atlantic Coast, which had a magnitude of 7.3 in the Richter Scale and
aftershocks of a magnitude of more than 4 on the same scale, leaving 7 fatalities and losses in
the millions of public and private infrastructure. Another problem Honduras faces was the lack
of identification, detention and prevention of the more than 180 confirmed cases of the N1H1
virus.
The Honduran Society Unites
While all this was happening, political, religious and civil movements where joining forces and
protesting against the commonly known “Fourth Ballot Box.” Exercising the constitutional
rights and guarantees of freedom of association and freedom of expression, they started to
publicize communiqués, make radio and televised announcements, and protested and marched
against the lack of respect demonstrated by the Executive Branch to the Constitution. New
movements were created, like the Generation 4 Change (Generacion X Cambio), Democratic
Civic Union (Union Civica Democratica) and the Honduran Allegiance for Peace and
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
Democracy (Alianza Hondureña por la Paz y la Democracia). Prestigious institutions joined in
the protest, like the Human Rights Commission, the Catholic Church and different Evangelical
Churches.
Never before in the history of this nation had people from different social status, educational
levels, color of skin, political thoughts, religious followings and even hereditary roots joined
together for one cause. Movements based on common ideals, character, democracy and peace
where the characteristics of those of us who joined the noble and exemplary cause. The finality
it had: to respect the Constitution and the laws of Honduras.
The way these manifestations for democracy took and take place stand out. Some used humor,
with protesters dressing with a cowboy hat and using mustaches like the one Former President
Zelaya uses. Others using a white shirt as they proudly held the Honduran Flag in their hands.
Incredibly no acts of vandalism, something seen on a daily basis in the country, have been
registered within the movements and their manifestations; there is no violence, there are no
weapons, public and private buildings are not defaced and even green areas are respected.
Measures taken to Counter these Unconstitutional and Illegal Actions
The answer came in 2 different ways. The National Congress and the State Prosecutor’s Office
acted. Both based their actions within the Honduran Constitution and Honduran Laws.
The National Congress of the Republic disapproved the illegal conduct and separated Jose
Manuel Zelaya Rosales from his office of Constitutional President of the Republic of Honduras,
and named Roberto Micheletti Bain to the post of Constitutional President. The decision was
based on various constitutional and legal mandates. Applying article 321, that expresses that
servers of the State don’t have faculties other than those legally conferred to them, that acts
done outside of law are null and that those acts carry liability, responsibility was deduced for
the illegalities Zelaya Rosales committed. They took into consideration the reiterated violations
of the Constitution of the Republic and the laws of Honduras and the non observation of
resolutions and rulings of the courts and tribunals. They also considered the fact that Zelaya
rendered the legal promise according to article 322 of the Primary Law when he took office and
that according to article 245 of the Constitution the President has the attribution of abiding by
and making others abide by the Constitution, treaties and conventions, laws and other legal
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
dispositions. Following constitutional article 242, that prescribes order of succession, and taking
into account that the Vice President of Honduras quit his office a few months ago, the office of
Constitutional President belonged to the President of the National Congress. In summation, the
Constitutional President of the Republic of Honduras is Roberto Micheletti Bain, until the
constitutional period ends on January 27th of 2010.
The State Prosecutor’s Office has presented and will continue to present Prosecutor’s Demands
before the competent legal authorities against the violators of the laws. In the specific case of
Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales, the actions have already started taking their due
course and warrants for his arrest exist for 18 criminal acts. The crimes he is accused of are
Treason, Corruption, Abuse of Authority and Violations of the Duties of Officials. One can find
these crimes detailed in articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution and 302-311 and 349-357 of the Penal
Code, among others. The criminal acts for which he is being processed include: extending the
period of service of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff by 3 years, note sanctioning or
vetoing 80 laws approved by the National Congress, blocking the transfer of funds to the Office
of the Municipal Mayor of the Central District, only transferring 5 million Lempiras of the 700
million owed to Mayor Offices on a national level, not transferring funds to the National
Congress, not presenting the annual budget to the National Congress for its approval – which
by the final days of June 2009 he hadn’t done and he had to have rendered it by September of
2008, extraordinary annual postings of certain executive offices, qualifying the decisions of the
Supreme Court of Justice and the State Prosecutor’s Office as political, alluding that the
National Congress acted immorally when they emitted the Law of Plebiscite and Referendum,
declaring that the Law of Plebiscite and Referendum was a lie, trying to install illegal ballot
boxes, not suspending publicity of the “Fourth Ballot Box”, destine state funds for the “Fourth
Ballot Box”, publicly exposing a minor that was infected with the N1H1 virus and the dismissal
of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
June 28th of 2009
A lot is speculated and very few can be legally stated, with the merited evidence, of what really
happened on the early hours of June 28th of 2009. What we can establish is the facts that both
sides have accepted. First of all, Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales is alive. His
detention was due to a court order that emanated from the corresponding Penal Court on June
26th of 2006, executed by the Armed Forces and who in consideration of the investiture of
Informing the Juridical Truth: From Honduras To The World
Laura Miranda-Flefil* and Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro*
President he once had, and to safeguard his safety, he was transported to a different country. It
has been established that Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales left the country on the
Presidential Plane. It is known that he landed in an airport in Costa Rica and he went to stay in
a hotel in San Jose. Former President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales enjoys personal freedom, as
evidenced by his statements given to international press, his various trips around the continent,
his public appearances and participations before the Organization of American States, the
General Assembly of the United Nations, with regional presidents and world officials.
Conclusion
In Honduras a consolidated democracy exists. We want to add that all of the institutions we
spoke of remain intact. None of these institutions suffered an illegal change of its officials
before, during and after the presidential succession, with no military personnel taking any of
these institutions. No law has been changed, reformed or repealed. There are no special laws in
place. Most importantly the Constitutional Order has not been broken.
Having analyzed the facts of the situation that is being lived in Honduras, from the legal
standpoint, we can categorically state that the usurper government was the one presided by
Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales. We base this assessment on the flagrant disregard for the
Constitution and the Laws of Honduras, creating precarious economical, political and social
situations. The way in which the Republics Institutions have acted are based on the rule of law
and look to respect and safeguard democracy, maintain order and social peace. The question is
left to the reader… WHO PERPETRATED THE COUP?
* Laura Miranda-Flefil is a Lawyer, Candidate for a Masters Degree in Corporate Law and Candidate for a Masters in
International Relations and Foreign Commerce
* Guillermo Alberto Bogran Castro is a Lawyer and a Candidate for a Masters in Economy and Law of Corporations (Italy)
**This document was translated by Laura Miranda-Flefil, Original Document: Spanish
Monday, July 6, 2009
Obama: The African Colonial
This is an article in The American Thinker written by Nigerian American L.E. Ikenga, which argues that Brack Hussein Obama does not come from an American perspective at all, but rather an African Colonial one. Though I have linked to the article, having heard it read in its entirety on The Quinn & Rose Show it was important enough to reproduce it here in its entirety given the current state of affairs in Washington that threatens the future of western civilization, let alone the USA itself.
The man in power in Washington has more in common with Robert Mugabe & Mobutu Sese Seko than George Washington or Abraham Lincoln.
Obama, the African Colonial
By L.E. Ikenga
Had Americans been able to stop obsessing over the color of Barack Obama's skin and instead paid more attention to his cultural identity, maybe he would not be in the White House today. The key to understanding him lies with his identification with his father, and his adoption of a cultural and political mindset rooted in postcolonial Africa.
Like many educated intellectuals in postcolonial Africa, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. was enraged at the transformation of his native land by its colonial conqueror. But instead of embracing the traditional values of his own tribal cultural past, he embraced an imported Western ideology, Marxism. I call such frustrated and angry modern Africans who embrace various foreign "isms", instead of looking homeward for repair of societies that are broken, African Colonials. They are Africans who serve foreign ideas.
The tropes of America's racial history as a way of understanding all things black are useless in understanding the man who got his dreams from his father, a Kenyan exemplar of the African Colonial.
Before I continue, I need to say this: I am a first generation born West African-American woman whose parents emigrated to the U.S. in the 1970's from the country now called Nigeria. I travel to Nigeria frequently. I see myself as both a proud American and as a proud Igbo (the tribe that we come from -- also sometimes spelled Ibo). Politically, I have always been conservative (though it took this past election for me to commit to this once and for all!); my conservative values come from my Igbo heritage and my place of birth. Of course, none of this qualifies me to say what I am about to -- but at the same time it does.
My friends, despite what CNN and the rest are telling you, Barack Obama is nothing more than an old school African Colonial who is on his way to turning this country into one of the developing nations that you learn about on the National Geographic Channel. Many conservative (East, West, South, North) African-Americans like myself -- those of us who know our history -- have seen this movie before. Here are two main reasons why many Americans allowed Obama to slip through the cracks despite all of his glaring inconsistencies:
First, Obama has been living on American soil for most of his adult life. Therefore, he has been able to masquerade as one who understands and believes in American democratic ideals. But he does not. Barack Obama is intrinsically undemocratic and as his presidency plays out, this will become more obvious. Second, and most importantly, too many Americans know very little about Africa. The one-size-fits-all understanding that many Americans (both black and white) continue to have of Africa might end up bringing dire consequences for this country.
Contrary to the way it continues to be portrayed in mainstream Western culture, Africa is not a continent that can be solely defined by AIDS, ethnic rivalries, poverty and safaris. Africa, like any other continent, has an immense history defined by much diversity and complexity. Africa's long-standing relationship with Europe speaks especially to some of these complexities -- particularly the relationship that has existed between the two continents over the past two centuries. Europe's complete colonization of Africa during the nineteenth century, also known as the Scramble for Africa, produced many unfortunate consequences, the African colonial being one of them.
The African colonial (AC) is a person who by means of their birth or lineage has a direct connection with Africa. However, unlike Africans like me, their worldviews have been largely shaped not by the indigenous beliefs of a specific African tribe but by the ideals of the European imperialism that overwhelmed and dominated Africa during the colonial period. AC's have no real regard for their specific African traditions or histories. AC's use aspects of their African culture as one would use pieces of costume jewelry: things of little or no value that can be thoughtlessly discarded when they become a negative distraction, or used on a whim to decorate oneself in order to seem exotic. (Hint: Obama's Muslim heritage).
On the other hand, AC's strive to be the best at the culture that they inherited from Europe. Throughout the West, they are tops in their professions as lawyers, doctors, engineers, Ivy League professors and business moguls; this is all well and good. It's when they decide to engage us as politicians that things become messy and convoluted.
The African colonial politician (ACP) feigns repulsion towards the hegemonic paradigms of Western civilization. But at the same time, he is completely enamored of the trappings of its aristocracy or elite culture. The ACP blames and caricatures whitey to no end for all that has gone wrong in the world. He convinces the masses that various forms of African socialism are the best way for redressing the problems that European colonialism motivated in Africa. However, as opposed to really being a hard-core African Leftist who actually believes in something, the ACP uses socialist themes as a way to disguise his true ambitions: a complete power grab whereby the "will of the people" becomes completely irrelevant.
Barack Obama is all of the above. The only difference is that he is here playing (colonial) African politics as usual.
In his 1995 memoir, Dreams From My Father -- an eloquent piece of political propaganda -- Obama styles himself as a misunderstood intellectual who is deeply affected by the sufferings of black people, especially in America and Africa. In the book, Obama clearly sees himself as an African, not as a black American. And to prove this, he goes on a quest to understand his Kenyan roots. He is extremely thoughtful of his deceased father's legacy; this provides the main clue for understanding Barack Obama.
Barack Obama Sr. was an African colonial to the core; in his case, the apple did not fall far from the tree. All of the telltale signs of Obama's African colonialist attitudes are on full display in the book -- from his feigned antipathy towards Europeans to his view of African tribal associations as distracting elements that get in the way of "progress". (On p. 308 of Dreams From My Father, Obama says that African tribes should be viewed as an "ancient loyalties".)
Like imperialists of Old World Europe, the ACP sees their constituents not as free thinking individuals who best know how to go about achieving and creating their own means for success. Instead, the ACP sees his constituents as a flock of ignorant sheep that need to be led -- oftentimes to their own slaughter.
Like the European imperialist who spawned him, the ACP is a destroyer of all forms of democracy.
Here are a few examples of what the British did in order to create (in 1914) what is now called Nigeria and what Obama is doing to you:
Convince the people that "clinging" to any aspect of their cultural (tribal) identity or history is bad and regresses the process of "unity". British Imperialists deeply feared people who were loyal to anything other than the state. "Tribalism" made the imperialists have to work harder to get people to just fall in line. Imperialists pitted tribes against each other in order to create chaos that they then blamed on ethnic rivalry. Today many "educated" Nigerians, having believed that their traditions were irrelevant, remain completely ignorant of their ancestry and the history of their own tribes.
Confiscate the wealth and resources of the area that you govern by any means necessary in order to redistribute wealth. The British used this tactic to present themselves as empathetic and benevolent leaders who wanted everyone to have a "fair shake". Imperialists are not interested in equality for all. They are interested in controlling all.
Convince the masses that your upper-crust university education naturally puts you on an intellectual plane from which to understand everything even when you understand nothing. Imperialists were able to convince the people that their elite university educations allowed them to understand what Africa needed. Many of today's Nigerians-having followed that lead-hold all sorts of degrees and certificates-but what good are they if you can't find a job?
Lie to the people and tell them that progress is being made even though things are clearly becoming worse. One thing that the British forgot to mention to their Nigerian constituents was that one day, the resources that were being used to engineer "progress" (which the British had confiscated from the Africans to begin with!) would eventually run out. After WWII, Western Europe could no longer afford to hold on to their African colonies. So all of the counterfeit countries that the Europeans created were then left high-and-dry to fend for themselves. This was the main reason behind the African independence movements of the1950 and 60's. What will a post-Obama America look like?
Use every available media outlet to perpetuate the belief that you and your followers are the enlightened ones-and that those who refuse to support you are just barbaric, uncivilized, ignorant curmudgeons. This speaks for itself.
America, don't be fooled. The Igbos were once made up of a confederacy of clans that ascribed to various forms of democratic government. They took their eyes off the ball and before they knew it, the British were upon them. Also, understand this: the African colonial who is given too much political power can only become one thing: a despot.
L.E. Ikenga can be reached at leikenga@gmail.com.
The man in power in Washington has more in common with Robert Mugabe & Mobutu Sese Seko than George Washington or Abraham Lincoln.
Obama, the African Colonial
By L.E. Ikenga
Had Americans been able to stop obsessing over the color of Barack Obama's skin and instead paid more attention to his cultural identity, maybe he would not be in the White House today. The key to understanding him lies with his identification with his father, and his adoption of a cultural and political mindset rooted in postcolonial Africa.
Like many educated intellectuals in postcolonial Africa, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. was enraged at the transformation of his native land by its colonial conqueror. But instead of embracing the traditional values of his own tribal cultural past, he embraced an imported Western ideology, Marxism. I call such frustrated and angry modern Africans who embrace various foreign "isms", instead of looking homeward for repair of societies that are broken, African Colonials. They are Africans who serve foreign ideas.
The tropes of America's racial history as a way of understanding all things black are useless in understanding the man who got his dreams from his father, a Kenyan exemplar of the African Colonial.
Before I continue, I need to say this: I am a first generation born West African-American woman whose parents emigrated to the U.S. in the 1970's from the country now called Nigeria. I travel to Nigeria frequently. I see myself as both a proud American and as a proud Igbo (the tribe that we come from -- also sometimes spelled Ibo). Politically, I have always been conservative (though it took this past election for me to commit to this once and for all!); my conservative values come from my Igbo heritage and my place of birth. Of course, none of this qualifies me to say what I am about to -- but at the same time it does.
My friends, despite what CNN and the rest are telling you, Barack Obama is nothing more than an old school African Colonial who is on his way to turning this country into one of the developing nations that you learn about on the National Geographic Channel. Many conservative (East, West, South, North) African-Americans like myself -- those of us who know our history -- have seen this movie before. Here are two main reasons why many Americans allowed Obama to slip through the cracks despite all of his glaring inconsistencies:
First, Obama has been living on American soil for most of his adult life. Therefore, he has been able to masquerade as one who understands and believes in American democratic ideals. But he does not. Barack Obama is intrinsically undemocratic and as his presidency plays out, this will become more obvious. Second, and most importantly, too many Americans know very little about Africa. The one-size-fits-all understanding that many Americans (both black and white) continue to have of Africa might end up bringing dire consequences for this country.
Contrary to the way it continues to be portrayed in mainstream Western culture, Africa is not a continent that can be solely defined by AIDS, ethnic rivalries, poverty and safaris. Africa, like any other continent, has an immense history defined by much diversity and complexity. Africa's long-standing relationship with Europe speaks especially to some of these complexities -- particularly the relationship that has existed between the two continents over the past two centuries. Europe's complete colonization of Africa during the nineteenth century, also known as the Scramble for Africa, produced many unfortunate consequences, the African colonial being one of them.
The African colonial (AC) is a person who by means of their birth or lineage has a direct connection with Africa. However, unlike Africans like me, their worldviews have been largely shaped not by the indigenous beliefs of a specific African tribe but by the ideals of the European imperialism that overwhelmed and dominated Africa during the colonial period. AC's have no real regard for their specific African traditions or histories. AC's use aspects of their African culture as one would use pieces of costume jewelry: things of little or no value that can be thoughtlessly discarded when they become a negative distraction, or used on a whim to decorate oneself in order to seem exotic. (Hint: Obama's Muslim heritage).
On the other hand, AC's strive to be the best at the culture that they inherited from Europe. Throughout the West, they are tops in their professions as lawyers, doctors, engineers, Ivy League professors and business moguls; this is all well and good. It's when they decide to engage us as politicians that things become messy and convoluted.
The African colonial politician (ACP) feigns repulsion towards the hegemonic paradigms of Western civilization. But at the same time, he is completely enamored of the trappings of its aristocracy or elite culture. The ACP blames and caricatures whitey to no end for all that has gone wrong in the world. He convinces the masses that various forms of African socialism are the best way for redressing the problems that European colonialism motivated in Africa. However, as opposed to really being a hard-core African Leftist who actually believes in something, the ACP uses socialist themes as a way to disguise his true ambitions: a complete power grab whereby the "will of the people" becomes completely irrelevant.
Barack Obama is all of the above. The only difference is that he is here playing (colonial) African politics as usual.
In his 1995 memoir, Dreams From My Father -- an eloquent piece of political propaganda -- Obama styles himself as a misunderstood intellectual who is deeply affected by the sufferings of black people, especially in America and Africa. In the book, Obama clearly sees himself as an African, not as a black American. And to prove this, he goes on a quest to understand his Kenyan roots. He is extremely thoughtful of his deceased father's legacy; this provides the main clue for understanding Barack Obama.
Barack Obama Sr. was an African colonial to the core; in his case, the apple did not fall far from the tree. All of the telltale signs of Obama's African colonialist attitudes are on full display in the book -- from his feigned antipathy towards Europeans to his view of African tribal associations as distracting elements that get in the way of "progress". (On p. 308 of Dreams From My Father, Obama says that African tribes should be viewed as an "ancient loyalties".)
Like imperialists of Old World Europe, the ACP sees their constituents not as free thinking individuals who best know how to go about achieving and creating their own means for success. Instead, the ACP sees his constituents as a flock of ignorant sheep that need to be led -- oftentimes to their own slaughter.
Like the European imperialist who spawned him, the ACP is a destroyer of all forms of democracy.
Here are a few examples of what the British did in order to create (in 1914) what is now called Nigeria and what Obama is doing to you:
Convince the people that "clinging" to any aspect of their cultural (tribal) identity or history is bad and regresses the process of "unity". British Imperialists deeply feared people who were loyal to anything other than the state. "Tribalism" made the imperialists have to work harder to get people to just fall in line. Imperialists pitted tribes against each other in order to create chaos that they then blamed on ethnic rivalry. Today many "educated" Nigerians, having believed that their traditions were irrelevant, remain completely ignorant of their ancestry and the history of their own tribes.
Confiscate the wealth and resources of the area that you govern by any means necessary in order to redistribute wealth. The British used this tactic to present themselves as empathetic and benevolent leaders who wanted everyone to have a "fair shake". Imperialists are not interested in equality for all. They are interested in controlling all.
Convince the masses that your upper-crust university education naturally puts you on an intellectual plane from which to understand everything even when you understand nothing. Imperialists were able to convince the people that their elite university educations allowed them to understand what Africa needed. Many of today's Nigerians-having followed that lead-hold all sorts of degrees and certificates-but what good are they if you can't find a job?
Lie to the people and tell them that progress is being made even though things are clearly becoming worse. One thing that the British forgot to mention to their Nigerian constituents was that one day, the resources that were being used to engineer "progress" (which the British had confiscated from the Africans to begin with!) would eventually run out. After WWII, Western Europe could no longer afford to hold on to their African colonies. So all of the counterfeit countries that the Europeans created were then left high-and-dry to fend for themselves. This was the main reason behind the African independence movements of the1950 and 60's. What will a post-Obama America look like?
Use every available media outlet to perpetuate the belief that you and your followers are the enlightened ones-and that those who refuse to support you are just barbaric, uncivilized, ignorant curmudgeons. This speaks for itself.
America, don't be fooled. The Igbos were once made up of a confederacy of clans that ascribed to various forms of democratic government. They took their eyes off the ball and before they knew it, the British were upon them. Also, understand this: the African colonial who is given too much political power can only become one thing: a despot.
L.E. Ikenga can be reached at leikenga@gmail.com.
Chamberlain's Ghost rears its Head
The Wall Street Journal has a great article today about what is going on in Honduras, Central America in general, and the unbelievable ignorance of history, which if it persists, may result in a bloody global war that would likely alter what has been known as western civilization, or even end the very traditions upon which it, and its anciliiary freedoms have rested.
The problem is appeasement. The ghost of Neville Chamberlain is stalking the halls of international diplomacy once again. And we saw the results of what happened the first time.
Chavez has maintained and increased his power only because of western appeasement which started in the Bush era, and has increased a hundredfold since then.
The Honduran people had the courage to stand up to the Chavista bullies, and the MUST be supported.
The only language thugs, be they schoolyard bullies or world-scale tyrants understand is resolve, and the will to fight back.
May the Hondurans stand firm against these organizations like the UN, OAS and the spineless governments that comprise them. That will hopefully give others living under oppression the will and courage to take back their countries from gangster governments.
The west has failed the Iranian people. Let's not fail these others who live in our wn backyard.
The problem is appeasement. The ghost of Neville Chamberlain is stalking the halls of international diplomacy once again. And we saw the results of what happened the first time.
Chavez has maintained and increased his power only because of western appeasement which started in the Bush era, and has increased a hundredfold since then.
The Honduran people had the courage to stand up to the Chavista bullies, and the MUST be supported.
The only language thugs, be they schoolyard bullies or world-scale tyrants understand is resolve, and the will to fight back.
May the Hondurans stand firm against these organizations like the UN, OAS and the spineless governments that comprise them. That will hopefully give others living under oppression the will and courage to take back their countries from gangster governments.
The west has failed the Iranian people. Let's not fail these others who live in our wn backyard.
Friday, July 3, 2009
More info from Honduras
Laura Miranda-Flefil and Guillermo Alberto Bogran castro have teamed up with a blog called Jovenes Luchando por la paz Y La Democracia in which the have posted a good article in Spanish outlining the situation, and dfining many of the terms being bandied about in the media. They hope to have it translated and up in English by Saturday.
The Christian Heritage Party of Canada Speaks Out on Honduras
In light of the Canadian government's cowardly, politically correct statement, I asked the leader of Canada's Christian Heritage Party where they stand on the presidential succession in Honduras:
Leader Jim Hnatiuk asked former leader Ron Gray to address the situation. Gray, who led the party from 1995-2009 had this to say:
"I'm sad, but not surprised, to see the Harper government siding with Chavez, the Castros and the Orgetas... and Obama.
A capsule summary:
Manuel Zelaya wanted to do in Honduras what Hugo Chavez has done in Venezuela: amend the Constitution to allow him to be "president-for-life".
That's already grounds for Canadians to distance ourselves from him!
When the Honduran Parliament wouldn't go along with the plan, Zelaya began diverting money from other ministries to fund his "referendum", and to use the authority and reach of state media (while he still had his hands on the levers of power) to persuade the people to vote "Yes" to his power-grab.
The Honduran courts authorized the military to depose Zelaya, which they did; and to install an interim president to finish his term, after which there would be new elections... which they also did. That's not a "coup"! When the courts order a military action, the civilian government is still in control of the military, not the other way around.
What's important at that point is to watch closely whether the courts are acting constitutionally.
It's a mark of media laziness -- and government ignorance -- that they call that a "coup".
To our left-wing mainstream media, any involvement of the military in Latin American politics is "a coup". But in reality, it was the deposing of a would-be dictator. If the people want to return him to office, they can -- when he runs in an election where he does not have access to government funds and government media.
Odd, how much it all sounds like what's emerging in Canada!
In the meantime, there are now allegations that Zelaya was linked to a major cocaine-smuggling cartel.
Since the courts authorized the deposing of the would-be dictator-for-life, and it is in the courts that those allegations of criminality will be tried, Canada should take the position that the Honduran courts should be supported and protected -- and closely observed to ensure that they are not sliding into corruption and unconstitutional usurpation of power (like Canada's courts!). But Ottawa should not have lept to ally us with three communist dictatorships and the naivete of the American narcissist-in-chief."
Leader Jim Hnatiuk asked former leader Ron Gray to address the situation. Gray, who led the party from 1995-2009 had this to say:
"I'm sad, but not surprised, to see the Harper government siding with Chavez, the Castros and the Orgetas... and Obama.
A capsule summary:
Manuel Zelaya wanted to do in Honduras what Hugo Chavez has done in Venezuela: amend the Constitution to allow him to be "president-for-life".
That's already grounds for Canadians to distance ourselves from him!
When the Honduran Parliament wouldn't go along with the plan, Zelaya began diverting money from other ministries to fund his "referendum", and to use the authority and reach of state media (while he still had his hands on the levers of power) to persuade the people to vote "Yes" to his power-grab.
The Honduran courts authorized the military to depose Zelaya, which they did; and to install an interim president to finish his term, after which there would be new elections... which they also did. That's not a "coup"! When the courts order a military action, the civilian government is still in control of the military, not the other way around.
What's important at that point is to watch closely whether the courts are acting constitutionally.
It's a mark of media laziness -- and government ignorance -- that they call that a "coup".
To our left-wing mainstream media, any involvement of the military in Latin American politics is "a coup". But in reality, it was the deposing of a would-be dictator. If the people want to return him to office, they can -- when he runs in an election where he does not have access to government funds and government media.
Odd, how much it all sounds like what's emerging in Canada!
In the meantime, there are now allegations that Zelaya was linked to a major cocaine-smuggling cartel.
Since the courts authorized the deposing of the would-be dictator-for-life, and it is in the courts that those allegations of criminality will be tried, Canada should take the position that the Honduran courts should be supported and protected -- and closely observed to ensure that they are not sliding into corruption and unconstitutional usurpation of power (like Canada's courts!). But Ottawa should not have lept to ally us with three communist dictatorships and the naivete of the American narcissist-in-chief."
Thursday, July 2, 2009
This Is Not The America I Know
When Barack Hussein Obama campagned on "change" he meant business. In 5 short months he has turned the USA from a force for good and liberty in the world, to one whose official policy seems to be dedicated to maintaining despots and oppressors in power just because they were elected, regardless of whether they were sham elections, such as in Iran, or if the instiututions of a truly democratic country defend the constitution against a despot, who happened to win one election 4 years ago, and then decided that his services were so indispensable that he had to steamroll a functioning constution to get his (or perhaps his puppetmaster's?) way.
Barack Hussein Obama dithered for nearly a fortnight when people at great risk to their very lives challenged a murderous lying dictatorship in the streets over the results of an election result which even a village idiot could see was fraudulent. The people were in the streets with signs in English, not Farsi, obviously asking for moral support from the west, which they saw (past tense) as an ally in their quest for freedom from a theocracy run by thugs in cleric's garb. Instead, The left leaning governments in Washington and London only said they were "monitoring the situation closely" and hoped to have talks with the government shortly. Some countries like canada and germany spoke harsh words of condemnation to the Mad Mullahs of teheran, but the voices that really carried iternational clout were hedging their bets.
Then when Honduras moved to defend its constitution and frredoms from a would-be despot who was closely aligned with the Chavez regime that currently holds the people of Venezuela, Barack Hussein Obama threw his lot in with the oppressors.
Imagine how the peoples of Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, El Salvador and othe rplaces might have been emboldened to overthrowing their tyrants had Obama, the so-called leader of the free world stood by a country brave enough to stand up to the imperialist ambitions of Hugo Chavez?
Under the leadership of Barack hussein Obama, the United States has so far earned an F- in foreign affairs.
This does not bode well for the forces of freedom anywhere, as deranged dictators like Kim Jong-Il now feel that they can act with impunity while a man as weak, ignorant and incompetent, and perhaps more so than Jimmy Carter occupies the White House. Perhaps this is why Israel and Taiwan, two democracies who have good reason to believe that they will be thrown under the bus by the Obama regime that would prefer to be in the good graces of their more powerful undemocratic neighbours, have stood in solidarity with Honduras, since they realize that they can no longer rely on anyone but themselves and their own determination to survive, since the USA can no longer be counted on.
As Nile gardiner points out in the London Daily Telegraph: "If Chavez or Ahmadinejad were booted out by their own people it should be a cause of huge celebration in Washington. If the Honduran example is anything to go by though, team Obama would probably demand they be put back in power as the "elected" leaders of their country. Wouldn't it make sense if the United States went back to a policy of actually backing its friends and allies and actively seeking the demise of its enemies?"
Don't hold your breath.
Barack Hussein Obama dithered for nearly a fortnight when people at great risk to their very lives challenged a murderous lying dictatorship in the streets over the results of an election result which even a village idiot could see was fraudulent. The people were in the streets with signs in English, not Farsi, obviously asking for moral support from the west, which they saw (past tense) as an ally in their quest for freedom from a theocracy run by thugs in cleric's garb. Instead, The left leaning governments in Washington and London only said they were "monitoring the situation closely" and hoped to have talks with the government shortly. Some countries like canada and germany spoke harsh words of condemnation to the Mad Mullahs of teheran, but the voices that really carried iternational clout were hedging their bets.
Then when Honduras moved to defend its constitution and frredoms from a would-be despot who was closely aligned with the Chavez regime that currently holds the people of Venezuela, Barack Hussein Obama threw his lot in with the oppressors.
Imagine how the peoples of Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, El Salvador and othe rplaces might have been emboldened to overthrowing their tyrants had Obama, the so-called leader of the free world stood by a country brave enough to stand up to the imperialist ambitions of Hugo Chavez?
Under the leadership of Barack hussein Obama, the United States has so far earned an F- in foreign affairs.
This does not bode well for the forces of freedom anywhere, as deranged dictators like Kim Jong-Il now feel that they can act with impunity while a man as weak, ignorant and incompetent, and perhaps more so than Jimmy Carter occupies the White House. Perhaps this is why Israel and Taiwan, two democracies who have good reason to believe that they will be thrown under the bus by the Obama regime that would prefer to be in the good graces of their more powerful undemocratic neighbours, have stood in solidarity with Honduras, since they realize that they can no longer rely on anyone but themselves and their own determination to survive, since the USA can no longer be counted on.
As Nile gardiner points out in the London Daily Telegraph: "If Chavez or Ahmadinejad were booted out by their own people it should be a cause of huge celebration in Washington. If the Honduran example is anything to go by though, team Obama would probably demand they be put back in power as the "elected" leaders of their country. Wouldn't it make sense if the United States went back to a policy of actually backing its friends and allies and actively seeking the demise of its enemies?"
Don't hold your breath.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Taiwan and Israel come out in support of Micheletti Government
Two freedom loving democracies who share the distinction of being pariah states because the major powers are kissing up to their powerful enemies have courageously thrown their support behing the new government of Roberto micheletti in Honduras.
If you can read spanish, the Honduran Blog "Libertad de Expresion" is a good one to follow as he/she tells the story of what is really going on that you don't hear inthe western mainstream media.
If you can read spanish, the Honduran Blog "Libertad de Expresion" is a good one to follow as he/she tells the story of what is really going on that you don't hear inthe western mainstream media.
Honduras: Follow the Money!
Could this be a big reason why Zelaya wanted to extend his term so badly?
It may also interest many of those who are screaming about the so-called "coup" that According to the Tegucigalpa paper "La Tribuna" Roberto Micheletti, the man appointed to replace mr. Zelaya, was from the same Liberal Party as the former President. Some "coup d'etat"
The fact is, that Honduras has, prior to 1982, spent many years under dictatorship. The fact that the few articles of the constitution that are not amendable, deal with term limits. Nobody wants to give another budding despot a chance. Mr Zelaya knew going in that he was allowed one term only. It strikes me as arrogant in the extreme that he thinks he is so indispensible to the country that extending his leadership by any means neccessary was required.
Sounds like a lucrative enterprise.
It may also interest many of those who are screaming about the so-called "coup" that According to the Tegucigalpa paper "La Tribuna" Roberto Micheletti, the man appointed to replace mr. Zelaya, was from the same Liberal Party as the former President. Some "coup d'etat"
The fact is, that Honduras has, prior to 1982, spent many years under dictatorship. The fact that the few articles of the constitution that are not amendable, deal with term limits. Nobody wants to give another budding despot a chance. Mr Zelaya knew going in that he was allowed one term only. It strikes me as arrogant in the extreme that he thinks he is so indispensible to the country that extending his leadership by any means neccessary was required.
Sounds like a lucrative enterprise.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
What the Honduran Constitution States and the current situation of Honduras:
This is from the blog of Laura Miranda-Flefil's Blog. She is a Honduran lawyer in Tegucigalpa. it shows prrof that the world governments are wrong, an that this was not a coup.
What the Honduran Constitution States and the current situation of Honduras:
The Honduran Constitution has been enforced in Honduras since January 20th 1982
This is the longest running Constitution in the History of our country
It was a Historical document that put an end to a time of great crisis in our country, after decades of military coups and presidents who abused reelection (one of whom stayed in power for 17 years)
The Honduran Constitution has a total of 379 articles
According to article 373, articles of the constitution can be reformed by declaration of the National Congress, in ordinary sessions, by a vote of no less than 2/3 of Congressmen.
Article 374 establishes the following prohibition: UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE CAN THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES BE REFORMED:
o Form of Government - article 4 of the Constitution
o National Territory – articles 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the Constitution
o The way the constitution can be changed – article 373 of the Constitution
o Presidential Term (4 years) - article 237 of the Constitution
o Prohibition of Reelection to the Office of President of the Republic – article 237 of the Constitution
o Disposition of those who can’t serve as President
Every article that doesn’t talk of such things CAN BE and some HAVE BEEN REFORMED
Question: what exactly did Mr Zelaya intend with his “cuarta urna” election last Sunday?
If anyone thinks he didn’t want to be reelected or stay in continuous power, he or she need only look at his various speeches over the last months, one of them last Thursday given over the course of 2 hours in which he stated “the reelection of a president will be a subject of discussion of the new national constitutional assembly” (what he wanted to install with the cuarta urna)
A constitutional assembly can’t coexist with Congress, installing one would mean the dissolution of this power.
A constitutional assembly means rewriting the whole constitution, which is unconstitutional.
The "cuarta urna" was declared illegal by the Court of Administrative Law, ratified by the Court of Appeals. The action to have them declared as such was started by the District Attorney’s office; the Attorney General answered the action by saying that the “cuarta urna” was UNCONSTITUTIONAL and ILLEGAL.
The Superior Electoral Tribunal declared the “cuarta urna” to be illegal and all material to be used for it to be illegal material.
The constitution and the actions in its defense are being supported by Congress, Supreme Court of Honduras, Superior Electoral Tribunal, Attorney General, District Attorney, Armed Forces, Human Rights Movement, Democratic Civil Movement, Generation X and Y Movement, Alliance for Peace and Democracy, the Catholic Church, Evangelical Churches and the majority of the Honduran Population.
Last week at least 50,000 people in San Pedro Sula, the industrial capital of Honduras, protested against the illegal “cuarta urna”.
Manuel Zelaya fired the Joint Chief of Staff for not accepting the unconstitutional order to make the armed forces guard the “cuarta urna” actions, congress (using article 205, numeral 20 of the Constitution) disapproved this action and reinstated the Joint Chief of Staff in his post. The Supreme Court of Justice admitted 2 writs by the District Attorney and a private attorney, temporarily reinstating the Joint Chief of Staff pending further review.
Last Thursday, Mr Zelaya and his supporters stormed the Air Force Base in Toncontin and extracted the “cuarta urna” materials that had been declared illegal; the material had been made and printed in VENEZUELA.
THIS IS NOT A MILITARY COUP. The Supreme Court of Honduras ordered the military to seize any illegal material, some of which was in the Zelaya household.
No constitutional power has been dissolved. All institutions are still at work and have the same elected leaders.
FURTHER MORE:
Article 42, numeral 5 of the Honduran Constitution states that citizenship is LOST if you incite, promote or support the continuity or reelection of the President of our Republic.
Article 3 of the Honduran Constitution states that “nobody owes obedience to a usurper government…who breaks or doesn’t acknowledge what the Constitution and its laws state. The acts that these authorities verify are NULL AND VOID. The population has the right to resort to insurgence in defense of CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER”
Article 2 of the Honduran Constitution states that the usurpation of any power of the government constitutes a crime typified as TREASON AGAINST THE COUNTRY and that these cases are imprescriptible and the action can be started by the state or by any citizen.
Honduras doesn’t have a vice president, he resigned to run for president himself, and by article 242 of the Constitution the President of Congress becomes the President of Honduras
128 of the 128 congressmen approved the decree that made Roberto Micheletti Bain the current president; he is no longer a congressman, he doesn’t hold any congressional office, he is no longer the president of the Honduran Congress, in other words he doesn't hold 2 offices.
Until last Sunday Honduras had yet to have an approved budget, Manuel Zelaya had yet to send it to Congress for its approval. This constitutes Penal Crimes of Abuse of Power and Disobedience.
Article 40 of the Constitution states that all citizens of Honduras have the obligation to abide by, defend and uphold the Constitution and it’s laws
Upon taking power every president (and every public officer) after 1982 have taken the following oath “I Promise to be faithful to the Republic, to abide by and uphold the Constitution and its laws.” Mr Zelaya took this oath and so did Constitutional President Roberto Micheletti Bain. (article 322 of the Honduran Constitution)
What the Honduran Constitution States and the current situation of Honduras:
The Honduran Constitution has been enforced in Honduras since January 20th 1982
This is the longest running Constitution in the History of our country
It was a Historical document that put an end to a time of great crisis in our country, after decades of military coups and presidents who abused reelection (one of whom stayed in power for 17 years)
The Honduran Constitution has a total of 379 articles
According to article 373, articles of the constitution can be reformed by declaration of the National Congress, in ordinary sessions, by a vote of no less than 2/3 of Congressmen.
Article 374 establishes the following prohibition: UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE CAN THE FOLLOWING ARTICLES BE REFORMED:
o Form of Government - article 4 of the Constitution
o National Territory – articles 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the Constitution
o The way the constitution can be changed – article 373 of the Constitution
o Presidential Term (4 years) - article 237 of the Constitution
o Prohibition of Reelection to the Office of President of the Republic – article 237 of the Constitution
o Disposition of those who can’t serve as President
Every article that doesn’t talk of such things CAN BE and some HAVE BEEN REFORMED
Question: what exactly did Mr Zelaya intend with his “cuarta urna” election last Sunday?
If anyone thinks he didn’t want to be reelected or stay in continuous power, he or she need only look at his various speeches over the last months, one of them last Thursday given over the course of 2 hours in which he stated “the reelection of a president will be a subject of discussion of the new national constitutional assembly” (what he wanted to install with the cuarta urna)
A constitutional assembly can’t coexist with Congress, installing one would mean the dissolution of this power.
A constitutional assembly means rewriting the whole constitution, which is unconstitutional.
The "cuarta urna" was declared illegal by the Court of Administrative Law, ratified by the Court of Appeals. The action to have them declared as such was started by the District Attorney’s office; the Attorney General answered the action by saying that the “cuarta urna” was UNCONSTITUTIONAL and ILLEGAL.
The Superior Electoral Tribunal declared the “cuarta urna” to be illegal and all material to be used for it to be illegal material.
The constitution and the actions in its defense are being supported by Congress, Supreme Court of Honduras, Superior Electoral Tribunal, Attorney General, District Attorney, Armed Forces, Human Rights Movement, Democratic Civil Movement, Generation X and Y Movement, Alliance for Peace and Democracy, the Catholic Church, Evangelical Churches and the majority of the Honduran Population.
Last week at least 50,000 people in San Pedro Sula, the industrial capital of Honduras, protested against the illegal “cuarta urna”.
Manuel Zelaya fired the Joint Chief of Staff for not accepting the unconstitutional order to make the armed forces guard the “cuarta urna” actions, congress (using article 205, numeral 20 of the Constitution) disapproved this action and reinstated the Joint Chief of Staff in his post. The Supreme Court of Justice admitted 2 writs by the District Attorney and a private attorney, temporarily reinstating the Joint Chief of Staff pending further review.
Last Thursday, Mr Zelaya and his supporters stormed the Air Force Base in Toncontin and extracted the “cuarta urna” materials that had been declared illegal; the material had been made and printed in VENEZUELA.
THIS IS NOT A MILITARY COUP. The Supreme Court of Honduras ordered the military to seize any illegal material, some of which was in the Zelaya household.
No constitutional power has been dissolved. All institutions are still at work and have the same elected leaders.
FURTHER MORE:
Article 42, numeral 5 of the Honduran Constitution states that citizenship is LOST if you incite, promote or support the continuity or reelection of the President of our Republic.
Article 3 of the Honduran Constitution states that “nobody owes obedience to a usurper government…who breaks or doesn’t acknowledge what the Constitution and its laws state. The acts that these authorities verify are NULL AND VOID. The population has the right to resort to insurgence in defense of CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER”
Article 2 of the Honduran Constitution states that the usurpation of any power of the government constitutes a crime typified as TREASON AGAINST THE COUNTRY and that these cases are imprescriptible and the action can be started by the state or by any citizen.
Honduras doesn’t have a vice president, he resigned to run for president himself, and by article 242 of the Constitution the President of Congress becomes the President of Honduras
128 of the 128 congressmen approved the decree that made Roberto Micheletti Bain the current president; he is no longer a congressman, he doesn’t hold any congressional office, he is no longer the president of the Honduran Congress, in other words he doesn't hold 2 offices.
Until last Sunday Honduras had yet to have an approved budget, Manuel Zelaya had yet to send it to Congress for its approval. This constitutes Penal Crimes of Abuse of Power and Disobedience.
Article 40 of the Constitution states that all citizens of Honduras have the obligation to abide by, defend and uphold the Constitution and it’s laws
Upon taking power every president (and every public officer) after 1982 have taken the following oath “I Promise to be faithful to the Republic, to abide by and uphold the Constitution and its laws.” Mr Zelaya took this oath and so did Constitutional President Roberto Micheletti Bain. (article 322 of the Honduran Constitution)
Canada on Wrong Side of Honduras situation.
Today I am ashamed of my country. A country that has so often been on the right side of history. A country spoke out against Apartheid before it was popular to do so. Who spoke out against the actions of the Iranian government's barbarism with regard to their elections.... On the eve of Canada Day where we celebrate our freedoms and constitution, the Canadian Government has appallingly come out against Hondurans enjoyong the same freedoms we are about to celebrate, and has added its voice to the growing numbers of leftists who support the restoration to power of a thug who sought to do an end run around the constitution of that country, and move his country out of the realm of constitutional democracies and toward a Hugo Chavez style tyranny?
Is our department of foreign affairs taking its mrching orders from Washington?
Memo to the so-called Conservative Party of Canada: Please do not bother to call for a donation, and take me off your mailing list.
Is our department of foreign affairs taking its mrching orders from Washington?
Memo to the so-called Conservative Party of Canada: Please do not bother to call for a donation, and take me off your mailing list.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)