Sounds like someone who hates... change.

/My cat is the same way.

The Honduran president was trying to hold an unconstitutional referendum.

But if you then remove him from power in a coup instead of impeaching him according to the Honduran constitution, which one is the greater violation of the rule of law?

I'm not saying the answer is obvious, but it's not a shock that a leader in the United States would consider the forced exile of a head of state a bit less legitimate than an illegitimate referendum.

Maybe Zelaya was staging this all along, trying to illegally remain in power but doing so in a way that the Congress would use Force, and therefore gaining the US as an extra ally?.

A radical leftist authoritarian who wishes to violate the nation's constitution for self-interest and glory? I think the coup hit a little too close to home for a certain POTUS.

Nemo's Brother: A radical leftist authoritarian who wishes to violate the nation's constitution for self-interest and glory? I think the coup hit a little too close to home for a certain POTUS.

Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

GAT_00: Nemo's Brother: A radical leftist authoritarian who wishes to violate the nation's constitution for self-interest and glory? I think the coup hit a little too close to home for a certain POTUS.

Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

Why bother? This is just another thread liberal Total Farkers are too afraid to post in.

/Did I do that right?

GAT_00: Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

mind addressing the facts of the article?

/nevermind

The right wing is criticizing how Obama treats our allies? Really? After eight years of George "My way or fark off" Bush, that's more than a little ridiculous. More bullshiat from American Wanker...

GAT_00
Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

You're kidding, right? Linking idiotic articles full of unsubstantiated bullshiat while spouting the same bullshiat himself is his entire shtick on Fark.

Sleeping Monkey, where are the jews and the space nazis?.

Bloody William: GAT_00: Nemo's Brother: A radical leftist authoritarian who wishes to violate the nation's constitution for self-interest and glory? I think the coup hit a little too close to home for a certain POTUS.

Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

Why bother? This is just another thread liberal Total Farkers are too afraid to post in.

/Did I do that right?

first you have to find some pathetic article to submit and then chat up you own headline because you're 12 years old and too insecure about people wanting to talk to you.

patrick767: You're kidding, right? Linking idiotic articles full of unsubstantiated bullshiat while spouting the same bullshiat himself is his entire shtick on Fark.

Actually, I'm more trying to kill his alt by following him around and making him not come back to the thread.

Doublek111: mind addressing the facts of the article?

What facts?

Want to discuss an American Thinker article ? get yourself a puppy. Try to find an especially stupid one that has to wear a cone around it's neck also... otherwise it might outsmart you.

Even as a trolling attempt that crap is too low to even warrant attention. Oooooh, I can find a source of BS that is 100% guaranteed to get a reaction, I'm soooo clever !!!!!

GAT_00: Nemo's Brother: A radical leftist authoritarian who wishes to violate the nation's constitution for self-interest and glory? I think the coup hit a little too close to home for a certain POTUS.

Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

I supplied you with three links. It is not my fault that you refuse to read anything that is blasphemy to your senses.

GAT_00: Doublek111: mind addressing the facts of the article?

What facts?

//nevermind.

Nemo's Brother: I supplied you with three links. It is not my fault that you refuse to read anything that is blasphemy to your senses.

Uh, you posted one link before I asked for proof. So I state once again, PROOF OR GTFO.

Maybe we need someone to flood the queue every single day with literally every article on Kos, and then in every single one we can issue a challenge that conservatives HAVE to respond to it or else they are cowards.

Yeah, maybe that's how Fark should be.

American "Thinker" is very concerned that we aren't being nice enough to the French.

Bloody William: GAT_00: Nemo's Brother: A radical leftist authoritarian who wishes to violate the nation's constitution for self-interest and glory? I think the coup hit a little too close to home for a certain POTUS.

Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

Why bother? This is just another thread liberal Total Farkers are too afraid to post in.

/Did I do that right?

You forgot to mention NBC.

propasaurus: Bloody William: GAT_00: Nemo's Brother: A radical leftist authoritarian who wishes to violate the nation's constitution for self-interest and glory? I think the coup hit a little too close to home for a certain POTUS.

Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

Why bother? This is just another thread liberal Total Farkers are too afraid to post in.

/Did I do that right?

You forgot to mention NBC.

KOS = Keith Olbermann Show. You libs are getting played.

propasaurus: You forgot to mention NBC.

You forgot Poland.

Bloody William: propasaurus: Bloody William: GAT_00: Nemo's Brother: A radical leftist authoritarian who wishes to violate the nation's constitution for self-interest and glory? I think the coup hit a little too close to home for a certain POTUS.

Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

Why bother? This is just another thread liberal Total Farkers are too afraid to post in.

/Did I do that right?

You forgot to mention NBC.

KOS = Keith Olbermann Show. You libs are getting played.

Nah, that's printboy's schtick. Although the line between them is blurring rapidly.

This is so true! The UN and OAS support this guy and everyone knows they're full of communists. Maybe BHO should threaten to make Honduras a glass parking lot. And give the German chancellor a neck rub. I heard she loves that.

propasaurus: Bloody William: propasaurus: Bloody William: GAT_00: Nemo's Brother: A radical leftist authoritarian who wishes to violate the nation's constitution for self-interest and glory? I think the coup hit a little too close to home for a certain POTUS.

Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

Why bother? This is just another thread liberal Total Farkers are too afraid to post in.

/Did I do that right?

You forgot to mention NBC.

KOS = Keith Olbermann Show. You libs are getting played.

Nah, that's printboy's schtick. Although the line between them is blurring rapidly.

are there scorecards available?

GAT_00: Nemo's Brother: I supplied you with three links. It is not my fault that you refuse to read anything that is blasphemy to your senses.

Uh, you posted one link before I asked for proof. So I state once again, PROOF OR GTFO.

Dude, he don't give a damn. I mean, my God, if he did, he'd actually try. His little "ZOMG hit a little too close to home!!!1" schtick is moronic. There's plenty he could legitimately slam Obama with, but he's not really interested in that, he's interested in knee-jerkery and givin' them libbies what they deserve for being so mean to President Bush!

See, when he realized Bush was a complete farkup, he realized that admitting it would mean that poor old Nemo was wrong- and, by God, that's like farking kryptonite to him. Wrong? I don't think so. So he delved into the cognitive dissonance and intellectual dishonesty. Hopefully, it'll keep him blissfully ignorant until he dies- I doubt he'd survive an encounter with honesty.

Bucky Katt: And give the German chancellor a neck rub. I heard she loves that.

It's twoo!!

Bucky Katt: propasaurus: Bloody William: propasaurus: Bloody William: GAT_00: Nemo's Brother: A radical leftist authoritarian who wishes to violate the nation's constitution for self-interest and glory? I think the coup hit a little too close to home for a certain POTUS.

Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

Why bother? This is just another thread liberal Total Farkers are too afraid to post in.

/Did I do that right?

You forgot to mention NBC.

KOS = Keith Olbermann Show. You libs are getting played.

Nah, that's printboy's schtick. Although the line between them is blurring rapidly.

are there scorecards available?

You can buy the souvenir program in the lobby during intermission.

I like The American Thinker, mainly for its logo of Uncle Sam taking a dump.

If either of them gets tired, the next new freeper can fill in without any interruption. They have 1 personality, 1 set of sources, and 1 approach to their presentation. It's like changing a light bulb... except that the new bulb is as dim as an old one.

Hey, all - I'm going to make up some vacuous statement and pretend that Obama said it, then be all pompous and indignant about it. Then I'll get all self-rightous and puff out my chest and say I told you he was bad.

Sounds about right.

Freepers are like the ugly girl who didn't get invited to the prom, so they sit around and talk about how ugly and fat the prom queen is, as they stuff cheetos and diet coke down their pieholes to make themselves feel better.

ragekage: Dude, he don't give a damn.

He hasn't come back either, has he?

darkhorse23: Freepers are like the ugly girl who didn't get invited to the prom, so they sit around and talk about how ugly and fat the prom queen is, as they stuff cheetos and diet coke down their pieholes to make themselves feel better.

That's actually a pretty good analogy.

darkhorse23
Freepers are like the ugly girl who didn't get invited to the prom, so they sit around and talk about how ugly and fat the prom queen is, as they stuff cheetos and diet coke down their pieholes to make themselves feel better.

Hey, don't knock them ugly girls, they'll take it up the ass and are always so damned grateful to you for it later. Wait, that's kind of like a freeper.....

A thread about an American Thinker article winding up just about as dumb as the article itself? Par for the course.

GAT_00: Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

What does that have to do with this article?

Baggins: darkhorse23
Freepers are like the ugly girl who didn't get invited to the prom, so they sit around and talk about how ugly and fat the prom queen is, as they stuff cheetos and diet coke down their pieholes to make themselves feel better.

Hey, don't knock them ugly girls, they'll take it up the ass and are always so damned grateful to you for it later.

and i like cheetos.

Hold on, now- the newswire said that the Honduran Congress just bravely removed the pesky rights to free assembly, speech, and due process from the constitution.

Now... hold on, I'm confused- Nemo and the other Fark Independents assured me that these Congressional people were Freedom Fighters(tm) waging war against the forces of socialism and tyranny.

I'm so confused at what to think!!!!11

More manufactured outrage from the usual suspects.

The American Thinker. Give me a farking break...

Make that Phil Herup, too! Phil, I know you're a jerk, but really? Is the Honduran congress just saving people from themselves, or what?

B-b-but old Europe

i must've missed my fax from hannity central - are we friends with the french again?

darkhorse23: Freepers are like the ugly girl who didn't get invited to the prom, so they sit around and talk about how ugly and fat the prom queen is,



Nice spin. I thought the Dems had a monopoly on ugly, and most likely did not produce that many prom queens.

csxtrainwreck: Sounds like someone who hates... change.

/My cat is the same way.

Phil Herup: darkhorse23: Freepers are like the ugly girl who didn't get invited to the prom, so they sit around and talk about how ugly and fat the prom queen is,



Nice spin. I thought the Dems had a monopoly on ugly, and most likely did not produce that many prom queens.

Ahh, Phil, that's right- you're too much of a troll to actually have an opinion, you just threadshiat. How could I forget?

Barrack Obama steals shoes from homeless people.

Mahmoud Abbas explains how to 'dial 9'

Phil Herup: I thought the Dems had a monopoly on ugly

Right wing satirical images are never funny. Never. They are never insightful. They are never well done.

You'd think you guys would come up with a good one occasionally, if just by accident...but you don't.

It's a shame, too. There's so much material for hilarity. Right wingers, I guess, are just as incompetent with satire, caricature, comment and irony as they are with government.

Came for the early morning whaaargrrrbl.

\\was not disappointed

ragekage: Phil Herup: darkhorse23: Freepers are like the ugly girl who didn't get invited to the prom, so they sit around and talk about how ugly and fat the prom queen is,



Nice spin. I thought the Dems had a monopoly on ugly, and most likely did not produce that many prom queens.

Ahh, Phil, that's right- you're too much of a troll to actually have an opinion, you just threadshiat. How could I forget?

Right I'm threadshiatting. darkhorse23 makes a completely ridiculous statement about fat ugly freepers... a bunch of you "geniuses" are are" Oh yeah... they ugly... they take it in the ass.... that is a very good analogy..."

I just post one pic and I'm threadshiatting. Oh, that is rich. So typical

American Thinker should change it's name to "American's pulling this shiat out of our ass".

Doublek111: mind addressing the facts of the article?

They managed to fit facts into an American Thinker article? Their whargarglers must be slipping.

Robert1966: But if you then remove him from power in a coup instead of impeaching him according to the Honduran constitution, which one is the greater violation of the rule of law?

I have yet to see anyone link or post anything relevant to the Honduran constitution that says they violated their "impeachment" or even if they require one. In their system maybe the Supreme Court or the legislature can directly remove someone without the two step process we have. Barring any evidence they violated their process I have to go witht he opinion of their supreme court and the unanimous voice of their congress that what they did was allowable.

eraser8: Right wing satirical images are never funny. Never. They are never insightful. They are never well done.



Translation: "Na na na na na na ... I can't hear you."

Bucky Katt: This is so true! The UN and OAS support this guy and everyone knows they're full of communists. Maybe BHO should threaten to make Honduras a glass parking lot. And give the German chancellor a neck rub. I heard she loves that.

Glass parking lot? Hey genius. The size of Honduras is about 68,000 miles. Who the h@ll is paying for all the Windex? Huh? HUH?

/didn't think I would find the hole in your cunning little plan did you?

I'm starting to think it's time to give the right wing a reason for their persecution complex. Honestly, I think they would be happier if they didn't have to fake being oppressed.

Sleeping Monkey: www.joeydevilla.com

that's excellent!

Phil Herup: darkhorse23 makes a completely ridiculous statement about fat ugly freepers...

Actually, he made a very apt analogy between bitter, shunned fat girls and bitter, shunned freepers.

And just like fat girls who self-destructively engorge themselves with junk food to make themselves feel better, freepers self-destructively engorge themselves on the same wharrgarbly nonsense that got their guys kicked out of office in the first place.

GAT_00: Actually, I'm more trying to kill his alt by following him around and making him not come back to the thread.

Not a good idea. The mods will then claim that you are trolling one of their cashcows.

GAT_00: ragekage: Dude, he don't give a damn.

He hasn't come back either, has he?

That account hasn't come back, but the actual user behind that account will come back in some form to this thread.

liam76: Robert1966: But if you then remove him from power in a coup instead of impeaching him according to the Honduran constitution, which one is the greater violation of the rule of law?

I have yet to see anyone link or post anything relevant to the Honduran constitution that says they violated their "impeachment" or even if they require one. In their system maybe the Supreme Court or the legislature can directly remove someone without the two step process we have. Barring any evidence they violated their process I have to go witht he opinion of their supreme court and the unanimous voice of their congress that what they did was allowable.

It really looks like they did everything by the (their) book. The true test will be in November when their elections are due.

I can understand our desire for stability and the avoidance of a military coup, but we should probably stay the hell out of it for now.

Yeah, whatever. More bullshiat. Nobody cares anymore.

liam76: Robert1966: But if you then remove him from power in a coup instead of impeaching him according to the Honduran constitution, which one is the greater violation of the rule of law?

I have yet to see anyone link or post anything relevant to the Honduran constitution that says they violated their "impeachment" or even if they require one. In their system maybe the Supreme Court or the legislature can directly remove someone without the two step process we have. Barring any evidence they violated their process I have to go witht he opinion of their supreme court and the unanimous voice of their congress that what they did was allowable.

The Honduran attorney general's office launched an investigation into why President Manuel Zelaya was flown out of the country Sunday and not taken before a judge, a top law enforcement official said Wednesday.

Deputy Attorney General Roy David Urtecho said his office filed charges against Zelaya last week for abuse of power and treason, and issued an arrest warrant. It's unclear, he said, why the president was taken to Costa Rica instead of court. (new window)


Even the farking Attorney General said the way it's done was irregular.

So he's supporting the rule of law?

COMMIE!

Phil Herup: Translation: "Na na na na na na ... I can't hear you."

That's more your response to my post than it is a translation of what I wrote.

I know how bad right wing satire actually is precisely because I actually open my eyes and give it a chance. But it's just never funny. It just comes across as bitter, like you're all a bunch of sore losers who are too dumb to get your act together so you throw rocks at the other guy.

Don't you ever get embarrassed by posting such crappy work?

I wish an article that dealt witht he facts in Honduras and Obama's reaction woudl get green lighted instead of one half filled with soft on Iran rants.

For the record I think he did the right thing with Iran. Honduras, however, his head has been up his ass.

Sleeping Monkey: www.joeydevilla.com

oh, a friend just pointed out there is a space ship in there, too.

This line of attack is cute, especially since it comes from the people who coined the term "Bush Derangement Syndrome".

Phil Herup: eraser8: Right wing satirical images are never funny. Never. They are never insightful. They are never well done.



Translation: "Na na na na na na ... I can't hear you."

Cozret: Honestly, I think they would be happier if they didn't have to fake being oppressed.

They have a comic featuring Hannity as some sort of cyborg radio pirate with Coulter and Co. as his conspirators as they desperately try to fight against what was essentially the polar opposite of the government system portrayed in V for Vendetta.

That was very bizarre.

Other important questions:

Should Obama kick this puppy? Yes | No
Should Obama outlaw Christianity? Yes | No
Should Obama rape Grandma? Yes | No

liam76: Honduras, however, his head has been up his ass.

Specifically, why?

Skleenar: Should Obama rape Grandma? Yes | No

Before or after he pushes her down the steps?

Skleenar: Other important questions:

Should Obama kick this puppy? Yes | No
Should Obama outlaw Christianity? Yes | No
Should Obama rape Grandma? Yes | No

I don't know about the others...but he should definitely rape Grandma.

Politics threads make me long for the utter destruction of the US government, if only to make the noise stop. I'm perpetually stunned by the way two people can look at the same event, and, thanks to the distortional lens of their political alignment, reach such wildly divergent conclusions about the event that I'm no longer sure that they're examining the same event.

Watching liberals and conservatives go at it- it's like watching a character with Chaotic Evil bickering with a Lawful Evil character. They're both evil, they just have different ways of doing it.

eraser8: Phil Herup: Translation: "Na na na na na na ... I can't hear you."


That's more your response to my post than it is a translation of what I wrote.



Perfect example of the classic " No U!" response.

Robert1966: But if you then remove him from power in a coup instead of impeaching him according to the Honduran constitution, which one is the greater violation of the rule of law?

I'm not saying the answer is obvious, but it's not a shock that a leader in the United States would consider the forced exile of a head of state a bit less legitimate than an illegitimate referendum.

It must be remember that he did not seek merely to hold this referendum. He defied orders from the Supreme Court of Honduras and the Honduran national assembly in doing so. When the commander of the Honduran military would not cooperate with said violation of the wishes of the legislature and judiciary (to say nothing of the constitution) he was sacked. He then defied the Supreme Court's orders to reinstate said commander. When the military still refused to participate he himself led a mob of his supporters to an Air Force base and seized the ballots so he could distribute them without the military's assistance, again in violation of Honduran law.

Holding a referendum is one thing. Assaulting military bases with mobs of your supporters, defying the wishes of the legislature and the orders of the supreme court is something more severe, regardless your opinion on whether or not the military was proper in deposing him.

...remembered, even. Arrg, too early to troll. Too early.

list of incredibly ironic right wing magazines/website names:
reason
american thinker

Phil Herup: Perfect example of the classic " No U!" response.

Project much?

Anyhoo, you never answered the question: Don't you ever get embarrassed by posting such crappy work?

I know it's tough, but have at least a little pride, man. Your whiny and bitter schtick comes off as, well, whiny and bitter.

DarnoKonrad: Skleenar: Should Obama rape Grandma? Yes | No

Before or after he pushes her down the steps?

I'm thinking after: With a broken hip, she'll be more flexible.

Phil Herup: eraser8: Phil Herup: Translation: "Na na na na na na ... I can't hear you."


That's more your response to my post than it is a translation of what I wrote.



Perfect example of the classic " No U!" response.

I like how you try to defend yourself from the thredshiatting accusations by posting irrelevant pictures and not engaging in any kind of discourse. Classic.

Phil, you always threadshiat. It is your defining characteristic. Anyway, don't you have any patients today in your highly successful dental clinic? I would think that you would be too busy to post during office hours. But hey, what do I know? You may be the dentist's equivalent of the Maytag man. Well, either that, or you are full of shiat... again.

Basij:
Holding a referendum is one thing. Assaulting military bases with mobs of your supporters, defying the wishes of the legislature and the orders of the supreme court is something more severe, regardless your opinion on whether or not the military was proper in deposing him.

This is why I'm a bit ambivalent about this situation. Obviously, the preferred way to deal with this is via civil procedures, but I can understand the actions of the military given that it's not entirely clear that Honduras has an impeachment process robust enough to deal with situations like this.

Sometimes you have to chose between two equally crappy alternatives, and hope you picked the right one.

DarnoKonrad: The Honduran attorney general's office launched an investigation into why President Manuel Zelaya was flown out of the country Sunday and not taken before a judge, a top law enforcement official said Wednesday.

Deputy Attorney General Roy David Urtecho said his office filed charges against Zelaya last week for abuse of power and treason, and issued an arrest warrant. It's unclear, he said, why the president was taken to Costa Rica instead of court. (new window)


Even the farking Attorney General said the way it's done was irregular.

The attorney general said sending him out of the country was irregular, not the arrest or removal from power.

Big difference.

It is a coup if you illegally remove someone from power, not if you legally remove them from power then give them the boot.

Maybe this is old news to you, but I am guessing fromt he date on the article it is pretty recent. Until now I haven't seen a single govt official complain of any irregularities.


Clarence Potter: Specifically, why?

Calling it a coup.

You and I may think it is odd or wrong to have the military involved, but it isn't our country. The military according to the supreme court and the congress was th appropriate body to remove and arrest him. A coup doesn't have the backing of the Supreme Court, and the unanimous support of the Congress. The only irregularity that has been pointed out (see above) was by the attorney general for sending the pres out of the country, and for the record the attorney general has said he backs the arrest.

So the facts we have from the country now, at worst, say they crossed the line by kicking him out, not by arresting him, and not by removing him from power.

t3knomanser: Watching liberals and conservatives go at it- it's like watching a character with Chaotic Evil bickering with a Lawful Evil character. They're both evil, they just have different ways of doing it.

So should we party like its 1955 and meddle in every affair in Iran and Central America?

At some point people have to choose to be free. We can't give it to them by pointing our guns at their oppressors. If we do we marginalize the demonstrators as tools of the American Empire. Similarly, we give those in power a common, external enemy to rally the country around. Shoot your neighbor is a much tougher sell than shoot the American interloper.

Wait, cons are now pissed that Obama's snubbing FRANCE? Wtf?

The conservative author must have balls the size of Idaho to ignore the fact that Bush alienated our allies in Europe and failed democracy in Iraq.

This isn't a "b.b..b..but, Bush" because I'm not attacking Bush, I'm attacking this moran that was apparently under a rock for the past 6 years.

Yes. Because we all know how much the right wing loves to love France.

Maddogjew: Phil, you always threadshiat. It is your defining characteristic. Anyway, don't you have any patients today in your highly successful dental clinic? I would think that you would be too busy to post during office hours. But hey, what do I know? You may be the dentist's equivalent of the Maytag man. Well, either that, or you are full of shiat... again.

The only person I see sitting at a computer at my dentist office for any length of time is the receptionist. Just a little food for thought on Phil's high paying career.

So long as everything is running smooth at United Fruit. Hate for the banana supply to be disrupted.

furiousxgeorge 2009-07-02 12:26:06 AM
American "Thinker" is very concerned that we aren't being nice enough to the French.


Conservatives are still upset that liberals made them change the name to Freedom Fries. They didn't want to snub their European allies.

liam76: The attorney general said sending him out of the country was irregular, not the arrest or removal from power.

Big difference.

It is a coup if you illegally remove someone from power, not if you legally remove them from power then give them the boot.

Maybe this is old news to you, but I am guessing fromt he date on the article it is pretty recent. Until now I haven't seen a single govt official complain of any irregularities.

This is not rocket science liam.

"a Honduran authority suggested that forcing Zelaya into exile might have been illegal."


Rule of law demands due process. Shuttling his ass to the border is not due process. You have to make him face the charges against him. What happened was a coup. Which why every nation in the western hemisphere is calling it a coup.

Maddogjew: You may be the dentist's equivalent of the Maytag man. Well, either that, or you are full of shiat... again.



Do you even have all of your teeth?

How many have you lost so far?

Ah.. another republitard topic on fark.

The mods should really start showing who has submitted the headline and who greenlit it so we could have a laugh at their expense.

Phil Herup: Do you even have all of your teeth?

How many have you lost so far?

Just a couple of wisdom teeth. Why, you want pics? If I send them to you, it will probably be the only dental related thing you see all day. Just think everyone, I could have a fake dentist inspect a picture of my teeth! Joy!

Phil Herup: darkhorse23: Freepers are like the ugly girl who didn't get invited to the prom, so they sit around and talk about how ugly and fat the prom queen is,



Nice spin. I thought the Dems had a monopoly on ugly, and most likely did not produce that many prom queens.

That's odd, because I could've sworn that the GOP's resident queen biatch (Coulter) is always moaning about how much women love the Dems and how the Dems wouldn't have won any elections in the last fifty years without women.

Most women of all races tend to vote with the Dems, therefore the Dems have a monopoly on all women, including those who are hot and those who are not.

Phil Herup is a modern day FlashLV.
He comes in, threadshiats, then spends the rest of the thread moving the goalposts and obfuscating.

Now now, lets not be too hard on Obama.

Even when you wish to meet without preconditions, it's still difficult to achieve peace in our time.

Phil Herup: Do you even have all of your teeth?

How many have you lost so far?

Up until last year I had all my teeth, including wisdom teeth and two extras on the mandible that came in when I was 35.

My previous dentist looked in my mouth the first time and said 'Wow, you've got a lot of teeth', counted, counted again, muttered something, took an x-ray and then told me that I had not only the full complement but an extra pair.

Had them and the wisdom teeth out last year and its just weird not having a bite surface that goes all the way back to the back of my jaw.

What's this story about? No idea.

/shark teeth motherfarker

Murkanen: t3knomanser: Watching liberals and conservatives go at it- it's like watching a character with Chaotic Evil bickering with a Lawful Evil character. They're both evil, they just have different ways of doing it.

//+5 Vorpal Holy Keen Scimitar for that DnD reference.

DarnoKonrad: This is not rocket science liam.

"a Honduran authority suggested that forcing Zelaya into exile might have been illegal."

Rule of law demands due process. Shuttling his ass to the border is not due process. You have to make him face the charges against him. What happened was a coup. Which why every nation in the western hemisphere is calling it a coup.

Exile was illegal. Not the arrest. Not the removal from office.

What makes a coup is the arrest and/or removal of office, not what you do with the person afterwards.

Also this is the first I have read about the attorney general saying any portion fo this was illegal. You have been calling it a coup since yesterday, which makes me think you made up your mind and are just looking for facts to back it up. That is the difference between you and me.

eraser8: Skleenar: Other important questions:

Should Obama kick this puppy? Yes | No
Should Obama outlaw Christianity? Yes | No
Should Obama rape Grandma? Yes | No

I don't know about the others...but he should definitely rape Grandma.

Are you watching and learning conservatives? This is how it is done. There is nothing that says quality satire, caricature, comment and irony quite like a good grandma rape joke.

Phil Herup: eraser8: Right wing satirical images are never funny. Never. They are never insightful. They are never well done.

Translation: "Na na na na na na ... I can't hear you."

Google Image Search for "Republican women"



You know who else thought highly of Republican TV icons? (new window)

I am a lifelong Conservative Republican .

I have an Associates Degree in the Science of Electronics .

Ann Coulter is a Goddess and I worship Laura Ingraham and Michele Malkin .



Conservative Internet Tough Guys: hope for a Liberal judge because in their hearts they know where truth and fairness really reside.

What an ugly Democrat woman might look like.

L82DPRT: So long as everything is running smooth at United Fruit. Hate for the banana supply to be disrupted.

Ha! The only other time I've heard United Fruit referenced was in a Stephen King audio book, In The Deathroom. Apparently they are a very evil corporation in the eyes of communist Latin America.

Phil Herup is the only troll who actually puts a smile on my face. It's like watching a grand artist paint, only infinitely more entertaining.

God's Hubris: What an ugly Democrat woman might look like.

The grammar is not strong with this one.

God's Hubris: What an ugly Democrat woman might look like.

It's so unfair that any politician can land a wife like that.

Sodden Moxie: Ha! The only other time I've heard United Fruit referenced was in a Stephen King audio book, In The Deathroom. Apparently they are a very evil corporation in the eyes of communist Latin America.

If I'm not mistaken, and I very well may be, they are the cause of the phrase "Banana Republic".

/too lazy to look it up this morning

IronTony: Phil Herup is the only troll who actually puts a smile on my face. It's like watching a grand artist paint with his own feces, only infinitely more entertaining.

FTFY

Where did Kyle Shiver go to school? Who hired this person to write such garbage?

If "The American Thinker" wants people to take them seriously, they need to hire an editor or something.

Murkanen 2009-07-02 09:30:53 AM
The grammar is not strong with this one.


The snarkometer is not strong with this one.

/it was obvious in my mind

liam76: A coup doesn't have the backing of the Supreme Court, and the unanimous support of the Congress.

After the fact, sure. Bit different there, yeah? The military just removed the one leader, by force, then asked the remaining political instutions "anyone got a problem with this?" is one intrepretation one could make of this, another being them saying to the military "Thank God you got rid of that pendejo" is another. Obviously this guy was at war with his own military (which, given the history of the region, makes me think he has a death wish) and yeah after the fact did their Supreme Court and Congress say YEA!; but calling this a coup is less a judgment than a simple statement of what transpired that night. If not a coup, what would you call it. The former president's Happy Fun Costa Rica tour? How would you react if, when the police went to arrest political leader here, instead of holding them for trial, dumped them in Canada? Does the time line bother you at all, that it took the Honduran Military 4 days to produce this detention order?

I also find it interesting that TFA faults Obama for snubbing allies when, on this matter, Obama seems rather in form with the rest of the world.

Still, I have seen no evidence that the removal of Zelaya was illegal under Honduran law. If his removal was not illegal, it was not a "coup d'etat." Reports from Honduras indicate the removal was legal and supported - even initiated - by Zelaya's own party, the main opposition party, all branches of government, and most Hondurans.

Has anyone found an English copy of the Honduran constitution yet? Someone was quoting articles from it in yesterday's thread, but wouldn't link to it.

liam76: DarnoKonrad: This is not rocket science liam.

"a Honduran authority suggested that forcing Zelaya into exile might have been illegal."

Rule of law demands due process. Shuttling his ass to the border is not due process. You have to make him face the charges against him. What happened was a coup. Which why every nation in the western hemisphere is calling it a coup.

Exile was illegal. Not the arrest. Not the removal from office.

What makes a coup is the arrest and/or removal of office, not what you do with the person afterwards.

Also this is the first I have read about the attorney general saying any portion fo this was illegal. You have been calling it a coup since yesterday, which makes me think you made up your mind and are just looking for facts to back it up. That is the difference between you and me.

Every news source is calling it a coup -- since the day it happened (you relize there's a world beyond Fark trolling OpEd pieces by rightwing lunatics right?). Even the lousy WSJ. Every government in the western hemisphere is calling it a coup. The OAS called it a coup. Nations have removed their ambassadors in Hondouras -- except for us.

And you're reverting to your time honored semantic games.

The arrest was done by the military, not the police. Irregular. His removal from office before being brought up on charges. Irregular. His exile. Irregular.

When they do it the right way, governments will stop biatching.

Until then, Hondouras is making itself a pariah and violating its own laws.

Phil Herup: Right I'm threadshiatting.

LOL

adamgreeney: Phil Herup: eraser8: Phil Herup: Translation: "Na na na na na na ... I can't hear you."


That's more your response to my post than it is a translation of what I wrote.

Sort of like Brtiney Spears Speculum and pictures of Michelle Malkin? Or is that differnt?

Perfect example of the classic " No U!" response.

I like how you try to defend yourself from the thredshiatting accusations by posting irrelevant pictures and not engaging in any kind of discourse. Classic.

canyoneer: till, I have seen no evidence that the removal of Zelaya was illegal under Honduran law.

How about the Honduran Attorney General saying it is? This is so busted it looks like you guys are being willfully obtuse.

DarnoKonrad: "Until then, Hondouras is making itself a pariah and violating its own laws."

How do you know that?

God's Hubris: The snarkometer is not strong with this one.

/it was obvious in my mind

Snark meet Poe's law, Poe's law meet snark.

Another hideous Democrat woman:


/be back in a few minutes

I'm starting to wonder if the flood of incoherent rants from the right isn't part of some sort of false-flag operation. What happened to all their decent writers?

Clarence Potter: After the fact, sure. Bit different there, yeah? The military just removed the one leader, by force, then asked the remaining political instutions "anyone got a problem with this?" is one intrepretation one could make of this, another being them saying to the military "Thank God you got rid of that pendejo" is another. Obviously this guy was at war with his own military (which, given the history of the region, makes me think he has a death wish) and yeah after the fact did their Supreme Court and Congress say YEA!; but calling this a coup is less a judgment than a simple statement of what transpired that night. If not a coup, what would you call it. The former president's Happy Fun Costa Rica tour? How would you react if, when the police went to arrest political leader here, instead of holding them for trial, dumped them in Canada? Does the time line bother you at all, that it took the Honduran Military 4 days to produce this detention order?

The Supreme court have said they gave the order to arrest to the military prior to the arrest. I have heard other people commenting that the Congress also agreed before hand, but have not heard any statements to that affect from a congressional spokesperson. The Attorney General has said ntohing about the arrest itself being illegal.

You are assuming the military arrested him prior to getting orders from the Cupreme Court or the Congress. If you are right, then yes it was a coup. However the versions I have read from the Attorney General, the Supreme Court, and what reporters have said about Congress disagree.

Clarence Potter: I also find it interesting that TFA faults Obama for snubbing allies when, on this matter, Obama seems rather in form with the rest of the world.

The article is a pile of shiat.

canyoneer: DarnoKonrad: "Until then, Hondouras is making itself a pariah and violating its own laws."

How do you know that?

I have google news and I can read?

DarnoKonrad 2009-07-02 09:41:49 AM
I have google news and I can read?

C'mon, Fark Independents^TM are used to taking a knife to a gun fight, but don't rub it in their faces.

DarnoKonrad: "How about the Honduran Attorney General saying it is? This is so busted it looks like you guys are being willfully obtuse."

You didn't read your own link very carefully, did you? Here's the quote:

It was the first time a Honduran authority suggested that forcing Zelaya into exile might have been illegal. "There were events that don't comply with the law," Urtecho said in an interview with a small group of reporters. "We are investigating why they did not execute the order and bring him to the corresponding authorities." (new window)

This fellow isn't saying Zelaya's removal might have been illegal, he's saying exiling Zelaya may have been illegal. He goes on to say "his office filed charges against Zelaya last week for abuse of power and treason, and issued an arrest warrant." IOW, the Honduran attorney general wants Zelaya so he can prosecute and jail him. Nowhere is it suggested by the Honduran attorney general that Zelaya's removal from power was illegal.

Come on, man. Don't make sh*t up.

DarnoKonrad: And you're reverting to your time honored semantic games.

I am playing semantic games?

A coup is an illegal removal from power. A coup isn't an exile that might be illegal (your source).

Unless you can point me to an expert on Honduran law that has more credability than the Supreme Court, and the Attorney General that says it was an illegal remmoval it isn't a coup.

That isn't a semantic game, words mean something. Calling this a coup with the facts on hand is just as dumb as calling the "war on drugs" a war.

One coup in the world is denounced and another supported. Welcome to 1960s America!

liam76: You are assuming the military arrested him prior to getting orders from the Cupreme Court or the Congress. If you are right, then yes it was a coup. However the versions I have read from the Attorney General, the Supreme Court, and what reporters have said about Congress disagree.

Sure that is what they say now. Like I said: The Military removes the guy then goes around and asks everyone "We did good, right? We wanted to ask you before we unloaded our weapons" is unfortunately the sort of more realistic fact pattern that emerges when one views this event in context with the last 100 years history of Honduras and Central America. I note with interest that the Honduran Congress also, the day after the man's... "evacuation" also produced a letter from the traveler ostensibly outlining his resignation from office. One wonders if this resignation and the HSC order came from the same pen.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8123126.stm

Here's what I think would have happened: His self-serving, stupid, illegal, non-binding, and ill-conceived referendum would have won, which would have upset the apple cart a bit too. What's his name would have used that like a bloody shirt to paint his opposition in nice bright pastels,and this precluded that.

Nemo's Brother: A radical leftist authoritarian who wishes to violate the nation's constitution for self-interest and glory? I think the coup hit a little too close to home for a certain POTUS.

Nicely summed up.

liam76: Calling this a coup with the facts on hand is just as dumb as calling the "war on drugs" a war.

No, a coup is any time the military takes over the government. There is no "legal versus illegal" coup.

Democracy is a joke. The tyranny of the majority almost always ruins it. It's just our lame-ass justification for meddling in the affairs of other countries (and wasting TONs of money in the process).

John Stuart Mill:

Like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majority was at first, and is still vulgarly, held in dread, chiefly as operating through the acts of the public authorities. But reflecting persons perceived that when society is itself the tyrant - society collectively over the separate individuals who compose it - its means of tyrannizing are not restricted to the acts which it may do by the hands of its political functionaries. Society can and does execute its own mandates; and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself. Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough; there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling, against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them; to fetter the development and, if possible, prevent the formation of any individuality not in harmony with its ways, and compel all characters to fashion themselves upon the model of its own. There is a limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence; and to find that limit, and maintain it against encroachment, is as indispensable to a good condition of human affairs as protection against political despotism. - On Liberty, The Library of Liberal Arts edition, p.7.

Do any of you idiots whining about Honduras realize that every single country that has voiced an opinion about the matter in Honduras has condemned the coup?

You people are deranged. Full-blown Obama Derangement Syndrome.

El_Swino

I'm starting to wonder if the flood of incoherent rants from the right isn't part of some sort of false-flag operation. What happened to all their decent writers?

I wasn't aware there were any. Oh wait, Christopher Hitchens is a pretty good writer, so they do have that going for them

pkellmey: liam76: Calling this a coup with the facts on hand is just as dumb as calling the "war on drugs" a war.

No, a coup is any time the military takes over the government. There is no "legal versus illegal" coup.

Except that the military did not take over the government here. The Honduran Congress has formally removed the President and named his replacement (who should now be recognized as the President of Honduras).

pkellmey: No, a coup is any time the military takes over the government. There is no "legal versus illegal" coup.

the military was listening to the COngress and the Supreme court, not acting on their own.

Clarence Potter: Sure that is what they say now. Like I said: The Military removes the guy then goes around and asks everyone "We did good, right? We wanted to ask you before we unloaded our weapons" is unfortunately the sort of more realistic fact pattern that emerges when one views this event in context with the last 100 years history of Honduras and Central America. I note with interest that the Honduran Congress also, the day after the man's... "evacuation" also produced a letter from the traveler ostensibly outlining his resignation from office. One wonders if this resignation and the HSC order came from the same pen.

I think the resignation is most likely garbage. And it makes me suspiscious.

But your BBC link has no proof that the military didn't have prior approval of the Supreme Court.

You might disagree that they are telling the truth, but surely you can appreciate that they may not want to be to public before hand givent he clashes between the military and civilians, and his police force.

This is the last I will say on the matter. If it comes out that the military did act prior to approval of the supreme court and or the Congress, it was a coup. If not his removal (but possibly not his exile) was completely legal.

You know, Republicans/conservatives are going to spin any world event in any way they can to make Obama look bad. It is like some kind of Obama derangement syndrome.

I would attack Obama for being too much like Bush on matters of domestic governance, but not for what he did and didn't say about Honduras or Iran.

As to whether I had Bush derangement syndrome, I gave Bush the benefit of the doubt. but I saw the kind of person he was when he did a photo-op with rescued miners from a cave-in, then weakened miner safety a few months later. But I don't remember being on his every move from day one of his presidency.

Actually that's kind of like Obama with the gays, secrecy, war on terror.
Boys and girls we elected ourselves yet another politician to the white house. We can comfort ourselves in knowing Obama is slightly less bad than McCain and Palin isn't VP.

\the one strong plus to Obama's presidency is scaling back the war on drugs when it comes to marijuana
\\I don't do pot but I believe strongly in legalizing it

Egalitarian,

Exactly right. Obama is just slightly left of the nazi bush. But compared to the rest of the world he is a fascist lite. We need a real Liveral party to stand up for gays, women, and the working man.

Obama derangement syndrome.

ODS is balanced by Chronic Obamapologism.

heh-heh. You said "jizzum".

Sorry. That should be Liberal party.

But seriously folks. Give Obama a year and we'll see what he's made of. Whats he been in there maybe 170 days? He probably doesn't even know where the best bathrooms are yet.

Egalitarian: You know, Republicans/conservatives are going to spin any world event in any way they can to make Obama look bad. It is like some kind of Obama derangement syndrome.

I think he has handled Iran perfectly.

I think he has acted too rashly with Honduras.

Bocanegra: Don't forget this charming tidbit:

What Is Wrong With America?

What is wrong with our values? It's not that hard to figure out. What's wrong is that we have been hit with some Boom Boom Boom.

[Black Eyes Peas video

Sorry, I just decided to cite something else from your source (new window).

Y'passive racist sons-of-biatches. =)

Lord_Baull: Phil Herup is a modern day FlashLV.
He comes in, threadshiats, then spends the rest of the thread moving the goalposts and obfuscating.

I know a place where flocks of Flash
\and he claims that he voted for Obama

And you're right, Phil Herup is vewwy similar. But his MO is different. I'm pretty sure he's not Flash.

liam76: I think the resignation is most likely garbage. And it makes me suspiscious.

But your BBC link has no proof that the military didn't have prior approval of the Supreme Court.

I never said it did or did not have prior approval of the HSC, which is why I said "one wonders", which you must have missed. Where did I say or imply that? Like I said, given the history of the region, the fake resignation letter, the convenient blackouts (cannot remember another time when a politician's detention coincided with a blackout, can you?), the muffling of the now-opposition media, jailing of supporteres of the traveling man; if it quacks like a duck...

liam76: You might disagree that they are telling the truth, but surely you can appreciate that they may not want to be to public before hand givent he clashes between the military and civilians, and his police force.

Actually, no I cannot, and this is the sheer stupidity of their argument and I suppose (by extension) yours: They're safe-guarding the democratic institutuions of Honduras by blanking power, muffling the media, and doing all of this in secret? Do you honestly believe that? If their actions had the full sanction of the HSC, the Congress, the Attorney General, the Human Rights Ombudsman, and grandma; why not arrange for this in the light of day where you have, say, the AG announcing this LEGAL procedure over the airwaves while the Military detains the man (detains, not exiles), while the Congress appoints a new leader for the country? Which has the greater weight of legitimacy both in the eyes of the average Honduran and the world at large?

rastjr: Egalitarian,

Exactly right. Obama is just slightly left of the nazi bush. But compared to the rest of the world he is a fascist lite. We need a real Liveral Liverpool party to stand up for gays, women, and the working man.



/pet peeve

rastjr: Sorry. That should be Liberal party.

I liked your first spelling much better. Makes me think that drinking is not only permitted at party gatherings, but that it is to some degree required.

rastjr: Sorry. That should be Liberal party.

Liverpool party's not THAT bad.

Mighty Horse: >eraser8: I don't know about the others...but he should definitely rape Grandma.

Are you watching and learning conservatives? This is how it is done. There is nothing that says quality satire, caricature, comment and irony quite like a good grandma rape joke.


That is actually not funny. It just isn't.


Lemme guess... you are a huge "Friends" fan, since you think unfunny things are funny.

patrick767: GAT_00
Hey, since I found you spouting your bullshiat again, mind looking back over this thread and proving the bullshiat you said in there?

You're kidding, right? Linking idiotic articles full of unsubstantiated bullshiat while spouting the same bullshiat himself is his entire shtick on Fark.

The ignore button is great. Go ahead, use it on known retard/trolls. Fark becomes a civilized place with intelligent discussions and humor.

ghare: Fark becomes a civilized place with intelligent discussions and humor when everybody agrees with my opinions.

ftfy

What Is Wrong With America?

Marijuana is illegal.

Hey Polydor- That's the Beatles label. Cool.

when everybody agrees with my opinions.

No kidding. Anything they don't agree with or understand is a "troll".

I figure anyone who is so afraid of accidentally reading something they use the "Ignore" button is the same type of person who bans books and buys things off late night television but not Girls Gone Wild. Juicers, mainly.

Clarence Potter: Actually, no I cannot, and this is the sheer stupidity of their argument and I suppose (by extension) yours: They're safe-guarding the democratic institutuions of Honduras by blanking power, muffling the media, and doing all of this in secret? Do you honestly believe that? If their actions had the full sanction of the HSC, the Congress, the Attorney General, the Human Rights Ombudsman, and grandma; why not arrange for this in the light of day where you have, say, the AG announcing this LEGAL procedure over the airwaves while the Military detains the man (detains, not exiles), while the Congress appoints a new leader for the country? Which has the greater weight of legitimacy both in the eyes of the average Honduran and the world at large?

Did you follow th enews leading up to this?

Mobs of people were breaking into military bases. The President was dismissing people he had no authority to. If you can't see how publicly saying the military was going to arrest him before hand might have caused more bloodshed I am going to have to ask the person typing for you to try and draw some pictures to explain because I don't have the patience. Just because it wasn't public before hand doesn't make it illegal.

As far as what would have looked more legit, I agree, but maybe saving lives was more important than making it look good.

At this point with news coming out I am not discounting th epossibility of it being a coup. I just think it is a little irresponsible to level that charge at this point.

How amusing is it that a right-wing nutjob website has "thinker" in the title?

Phil Herup: That is actually not funny. It just isn't.


Lemme guess... you are a huge "Friends" fan, since you think unfunny things are funny.

On another break Phil? Your previous comments lead me to believe that you should never judge what is and what isn't funny.

ghare: The ignore button is great. Go ahead, use it on known retard/trolls. Fark becomes a civilized place with intelligent discussions and humor.

.... and we can have huge libby circle jerks without interruption from those hate-filled right wing troglodytes while we sip our Starbucks lattes.


FTFY

Maddogjew: Your previous comments lead me to believe that you should never judge what is and what isn't funny.



I have judged!

I know I do not have the wealth of experience of say, a wise old Latino woman, but I do know when something is funny.

People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

Phil Herup: hate-filled right wing troglodytes

Well, it is difficult finding a right-winger in a political thread who's not hate-filled.

* albo
* HOV
* six fingered man
* canisnoir
* does Weaver95 count?

...that's about it

.... and we can have huge libby circle jerks without interruption from those hate-filled right wing troglodytes while we sip our Starbucks lattes.

If I were the most ignored Farker on fark.com I'd be damn proud. I might even buy one of those gay t-shirts.

First of all, whoever wrote the article is slightly retarded/needs an editor.

Second of all, I appreciate the way Obama carefully handled Iran,not crushing the protest movement, but this is just goddamn stupid.The military, the supreme court, his own party, and a majority of Hondurans supported this. The people trying to get involved with this need to stay the fark out of another country's business.

Bocanegra: Don't forget this charming tidbit:



Oh yeah, the unemployment rate just went up. So expect an even steeper upward turn on this graph within a few days.



"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future."

Phil Herup: I know I do not have the wealth of experience of say, a wise old Latino woman a hydrocephalic Jerry's kid , but I do know when something is funny.

FTFY

Slow day in the office Phil?

Davey Croquette: when everybody agrees with my opinions.

No kidding. Anything they don't agree with or understand is a "troll".

I figure anyone who is so afraid of accidentally reading something they use the "Ignore" button is the same type of person who bans books and buys things off late night television but not Girls Gone Wild. Juicers, mainly.

Nope. Known retard/trolls are not worth paying any attention to, at all. Unfortunately, most all the right wing has is crazies and trolls. It would be nice to have intelligent right wingers posting, but like in real life, only 22% of Farkers are rightwing, and most of them are people who have nothing of value at all to say. LIBSLIBSLIBSLIBS! is boring and pointless.

liam76: Did you follow th enews leading up to this?

Mobs of people were breaking into military bases. The President was dismissing people he had no authority to. If you can't see how publicly saying the military was going to arrest him before hand might have caused more bloodshed I am going to have to ask the person typing for you to try and draw some pictures to explain because I don't have the patience. Just because it wasn't public before hand doesn't make it illegal.

Yea I did and the history of the region, of the players, the factions, etc etc etc. About which you seem not to care, forgetful, or ignorant. And you will note I did not say announcing his detention beforehand; I mentioned coordinating this action in conjunction with the other branches of government. Why not take a reporter or a pool of reporters from La Prensa into the know? Why do things that give the apprearance of making it all seem they are thieves in the night? I mean, after all... if what the Honduran Military did was 100% legitimate, tCare to comment on the provenance of the man's resignation letter? I suspect the military planners had that and the HSC order all ready to go; the HSC played ball but the the traveling man did not.

liam76: As far as what would have looked more legit, I agree, but maybe saving lives was more important than making it look good.

Which is, after all, the oldest excuse in the LatAm Military book when justifying a coup: We did so to safeguard the lives of the public, to guarantee domestic order, and to ensure the stability of the situation. So really no it is not, and congrats on becoming an apologist for the Honduran military. And, given recent events, think they were being penny-wise and pound-foolish? If only they had bothered to do things legally...

m2313: The people trying to get involved with this need to stay the fark out of another country's business.

Honduras is a US client state. We're already involved in this.

liam76: Mobs of people were breaking into military bases.

When?

The President was dismissing people he had no authority to. If you can't see how publicly saying the military was going to arrest him before hand might have caused more bloodshed

More bloodshed than what? Also, do you support demonstrations in Iran? If so, why is that different from Honduras?

Just because it wasn't public before hand doesn't make it illegal.

Please show me the section of the Honduras constitution and the corresponding legal code authorizing the arrest and deportation of a sitting president, including the procedures to be followed.

changeit: Democracy is a joke. The tyranny of the majority almost always ruins it. It's just our lame-ass justification for meddling in the affairs of other countries (and wasting TONs of money in the process).

John Stuart Mill:

Like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majority was at first, and is still vulgarly, ...

I like other JSM quotes"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives."

Davey Croquette: when everybody agrees with my opinions.

No kidding. Anything they don't agree with or understand is a "troll".

I figure anyone who is so afraid of accidentally reading something they use the "Ignore" button is the same type of person who bans books and buys things off late night television but not Girls Gone Wild. Juicers, mainly.

There's a big difference between disagreeing and having a conversation/debate with someone that doesn't agree with you compared to some of the idiot trolls who post shiat that is meant to do nothing but inflame and usually has no basis in reality.

But go one pretending it's different so you can pretend you are someone 'better'.

Pandering to the PITA again. Anyone who thought Iran was a democracy is an idiot. In a democracy, everyone votes on every issue. How many democracies are there worldwide? We'd have to search small South Pacific islands to find one.

compared to some of the idiot trolls who post shiat that is meant to do nothing but inflame and usually has no basis in reality.

WTF do you care what they post. That's like saying you don't like what's on a billboard. Don't read it. And if you accidentally read it, forget about it. It's words on a page. They won't hurt you.

I wonder if Phil has all these tiny images in one photobucket, ready to go, or if he acquires them as the need arises.

DarnoKonrad: canyoneer: DarnoKonrad: "Until then, Hondouras is making itself a pariah and violating its own laws."

How do you know that?

I have google news and I can read?

Elitist.

elchip: Phil Herup: hate-filled right wing troglodytes

Well, it is difficult finding a right-winger in a political thread who's not hate-filled.

* albo
* HOV
* six fingered man
* canisnoir
* does Weaver95 count?

...that's about it

Yup, you're right, I'm not hate filled enuf to jump into this particular vipers nest ;) I think Obama played Iran right at first but faltered on it at the end, as for Honduras, well, we meddle there but not in Iran?

Oh well, it's not some ground breaking thing that would turn me from an Obama Skeptic into an Obama hater so meh.

I leave you with this...Not a Rick Roll because that would be below me ;) (new window)

You left out: "bullying Israel".

I have heard that exact phrase used along with the headline no less than ten times this week.

CanisNoir: as for Honduras, well, we meddle there but not in Iran?

Honduras has been a US client state for decades. Supporting another coup in Latin America makes us look bad.

Wow, so it sounds like the freedom-loving coup leaders have passed an Emergency Freedom Act.

The same Congress that, after the military had kidnapped, beaten and dumped President Manuel Zelaya in Costa Rica had declared one of its own, Roberto Micheletti as the coup "president" today passed an emergency law stripping Hondurans of the following rights from the country's constitution:

1. The right to protest.

2. Freedom in one's home from unwarranted search, seizure and arrest.

3. Freedom of association.

4. Guarantees of rights of due process while under arrest.

5. Freedom of transit in the country.

Fart_Machine: Honduras has been a US client state for decades. Supporting another coup in Latin America makes us look bad.

Well this wasn't exactly your typical Latin American Coup though, still you've got a point. Like I said, I have a hard time looking at this stuff negatively. I was dissapointed by his later Iran stance but I understood where he was coming from with it so I don't hold it against him; at least I'm not outraged by it or think he's anti-freedom.

Aexia: Wow, so it sounds like the freedom-loving coup leaders have passed an Emergency Freedom Act.

The same Congress that, after the military had kidnapped, beaten and dumped President Manuel Zelaya in Costa Rica had declared one of its own, Roberto Micheletti as the coup "president" today passed an emergency law stripping Hondurans of the following rights from the country's constitution:

1. The right to protest.

2. Freedom in one's home from unwarranted search, seizure and arrest.

3. Freedom of association.

4. Guarantees of rights of due process while under arrest.

5. Freedom of transit in the country.

But they're not Iran so it's OK.

Phil Herup: darkhorse23: Freepers are like the ugly girl who didn't get invited to the prom, so they sit around and talk about how ugly and fat the prom queen is,



Nice spin. I thought the Dems had a monopoly on ugly, and most likely did not produce that many prom queens.

So Phil, what you are saying is that old or black women are ugly?

Phil Herup: ragekage: Phil Herup: darkhorse23: Freepers are like the ugly girl who didn't get invited to the prom, so they sit around and talk about how ugly and fat the prom queen is,



Nice spin. I thought the Dems had a monopoly on ugly, and most likely did not produce that many prom queens.

Ahh, Phil, that's right- you're too much of a troll to actually have an opinion, you just threadshiat. How could I forget?

Right I'm threadshiatting. darkhorse23 makes a completely ridiculous statement about fat ugly freepers... a bunch of you "geniuses" are are" Oh yeah... they ugly... they take it in the ass.... that is a very good analogy..."

I just post one pic and I'm threadshiatting. Oh, that is rich. So typical

OMG you don't know what an anology is.

I never thought you were that stupid.

Jackpot777 2009-07-02 09:27:45 AM
"Conservative Internet Tough Guys: hope for a Liberal judge because in their hearts they know where truth and fairness really reside."

I bet you anything that, if they had the chance, the members of the Unitarian Universalist church would not have requested that Jim Adkisson get the death penalty. Instead he plead guilty and got a life sentence without possibility of parole.

canyoneer: You didn't read your own link very carefully, did you?

Yes I did. And you're embarrassing yourself.

liam76: A coup is an illegal removal from power. A coup isn't an exile that might be illegal (your source).

You're being willfully obtuse. Beating up on bag of doorknobs is only fun for so long.

So Republicans would have been ok with a military coup when George Bush's approval rating hit 30%? Sounds pretty un-American to me.

I suggest we round up all Republicans that support the Honduran military coup and execute them for treason.

All2morrowsparTs: So Phil, what you are saying is that old or black women are ugly?



Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly is to the bone.

No race or age is excluded, but nice try at a racist spin. Not surprising you tried to go there.

DarnoKonrad: "Yes I did."

OK. Where in that story does it say that the attorney general of Honduras is claiming that Zelaya's removal from power was illegal? Nowhere, because he doesn't. In fact, he wanted Zelaya turned over not to restore him to power, but to prosecute him for treason.

It's funny that you would make condescending statements when you can't prove your point. I still would like to see any evidence that removing Zelaya from the presidency was illegal under Honduran law. If you can provide any evidence, I'll be happy to read it.

rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

Your dumb.

Tor_Eckman: "Your dumb."

Haha

canyoneer: DarnoKonrad: "Yes I did."

OK. Where in that story does it say that the attorney general of Honduras is claiming that Zelaya's removal from power was illegal? Nowhere, because he doesn't. In fact, he wanted Zelaya turned over not to restore him to power, but to prosecute him for treason.

It's funny that you would make condescending statements when you can't prove your point. I still would like to see any evidence that removing Zelaya from the presidency was illegal under Honduran law. If you can provide any evidence, I'll be happy to read it.

What the President tried to do in Honduras was wrong and he should be prosecuted by the laws, not by the military, it's a basic concept.

canyoneer: Tor_Eckman: "Your dumb."

Haha


That would have been a good time for a "Your a idiot" bomb.

Russky: "What the President tried to do in Honduras was wrong and he should be prosecuted by the laws, not by the military, it's a basic concept."

But what actually happened?

The supreme court and Congress, and Zelaya's own party and the main opposition party, ruled and voted for his removal from the presidency, the attorney general indicted him for treason, and then the supreme court ordered the military to remove him from the presidential palace. There is no evidence that any of this was illegal under Honduran law or unconstitutional under the Honduran constitution.

If you have any evidence that this was illegal under Honduran law, I will be glad to read it.

Oh wait, we like France and Germany now? The remnants of the discredited neocon army move the goals faster than HotShot Arcade Basketball...

You don't want to put this thing on the 'neocon' setting...it would just be a blur

canyoneer: Tor_Eckman: "Your dumb."

Haha

I figured it would be appropriate to use ijit Phil's misspell troll under these circumstances.

I see it worked.

Tor_Eckman: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

Your dumb.

Oh man, priceless. Tor_Eckman Total Fark. Tor, would you like to apologise or are you going to be a douche? I don't start 'em but I do finish 'em.

jules_siegel: More bloodshed than what? Also, do you support demonstrations in Iran? If so, why is that different from Honduras?

Honduras has a constitution that was designed by people elected to office.

The president of Honduras was removed from power with approval from Congress who were elected by the people.

jules_siegel: Please show me the section of the Honduras constitution and the corresponding legal code authorizing the arrest and deportation of a sitting president, including the procedures to be followed.

You are saying it is a coup without proof. You are making the claim that what the Supreme Court did is illegal. You are claiming the unanimous voice of congress is wrong.

When it comes to Honduran law I trust those a lot more than I do some guy on the internet who thinks it is wrong because it isn't done that way in the US.

The only relevnat piece of Honduran law that I have seen, article 239 of the constitution agrees that the president should be relieved of power. The only legal complaint I have seen against what happened was about the exile, not the reliving fo power, nor the arrest.

DarnoKonrad: You're being willfully obtuse. Beating up on bag of doorknobs is only fun for so long.

Yes trying to get you to understand that a potentially illegal exile isn't the same as a coup is a like beating a bag of doorknobs.

canyoneer: He goes on to say "his office filed charges against Zelaya last week for abuse of power and treason, and issued an arrest warrant." IOW, the Honduran attorney general wants Zelaya so he can prosecute and jail him.

Which is precisely how it should have gone down rather than stealing him away in the middle of the night, forging a letter of resignation, and forcing him into exile in Costa Rica. That's what the controversy is all about and why the international community protested the way he was ousted.

rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

Your dumb.

Oh man, priceless. Tor_Eckman Total Fark. Tor, would you like to apologise or are you going to be a douche? I don't start 'em but I do finish 'em.

Apologize? You lovingly fellate attention whoring, threadjacking, contrarian troll Philboy and you want me to apologize?

Your a idiot.

liam76:
You are saying it is a coup without proof.

I'm sure that whenever a coup occurs the victors are going to claim it's legal. After all since they're in power they can determine the legality of it.

REPUBLICAN TEARS: They are Sweet, Crisp, and Satisfying.

Get your bottle today!

Tor_Eckman: rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

Your dumb.

Oh man, priceless. Tor_Eckman Total Fark. Tor, would you like to apologise or are you going to be a douche? I don't start 'em but I do finish 'em.

Apologize? You lovingly fellate attention whoring, threadjacking, contrarian troll Philboy and you want me to apologize?

Your a idiot.

Yes, you got on your high and mighty Total Fark horse and called me dumb. The way I was brought, you apologise for things you shouldn't of said or you get punished.

I have not once threadjacked a thread or attentionwhored. Don't even know what a Philboy is?

So are you goig to apoligise?

liam76: The president of Honduras was removed from power with approval from Congress who were elected by the people.

There's dancing around the issue, and then there's this.

Fart_Machine: "Which is precisely how it should have gone down rather than stealing him away in the middle of the night, forging a letter of resignation, and forcing him into exile in Costa Rica. That's what the controversy is all about and why the international community protested the way he was ousted."

That was all after he was removed from power. As far as I can tell, his removal from power was legally done under Honduran law. Once again, if anyone can provide evidence that his removal from power was unconstitutional, I'll be happy to look at it.

I wonder: What is the penalty for treason under Honduran law? By kicking Zelaya out of the country, they may have done him a favor.

liam76: The only relevnat piece of Honduran law that I have seen, article 239 of the constitution agrees that the president should be relieved of power. The only legal complaint I have seen against what happened was about the exile, not the reliving fo power, nor the arrest.

Here's the exact wording of the article:

Article 239 - No citizen that has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President.

Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.

Where and when did Zelaya violate this provision? Please be specific, and cite his exact words and deeds.

canyoneer: Russky: "What the President tried to do in Honduras was wrong and he should be prosecuted by the laws, not by the military, it's a basic concept."

But what actually happened?

The supreme court and Congress, and Zelaya's own party and the main opposition party, ruled and voted for his removal from the presidency, the attorney general indicted him for treason, and then the supreme court ordered the military to remove him from the presidential palace. There is no evidence that any of this was illegal under Honduran law or unconstitutional under the Honduran constitution.

If you have any evidence that this was illegal under Honduran law, I will be glad to read it.


The coup is in violation of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, which was signed in Lima, Peru, in 2001.

This charter, affirming defense of democracy in the hemisphere, has been ratified by all member states of the Organization of American States (OAS).

Article 9 of the charter specifically addresses coups and the actions to be taken-including suspension from OAS membership-as a result of an illegal takeover of government. Not one government in the Americas has recognized the newly installed government, all citing it as an illegal entity in violation of international law.

rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

Your dumb.

Oh man, priceless. Tor_Eckman Total Fark. Tor, would you like to apologise or are you going to be a douche? I don't start 'em but I do finish 'em.

Apologize? You lovingly fellate attention whoring, threadjacking, contrarian troll Philboy and you want me to apologize?

Your a idiot.

Yes, you got on your high and mighty Total Fark horse and called me dumb. The way I was brought, you apologise for things you shouldn't of said or you get punished.

I have not once threadjacked a thread or attentionwhored. Don't even know what a Philboy is?

So are you goig to apoligise?

I'm sorry, I thought you spoke english.

Nevermind.

God's Hubris: Another hideous Democrat woman:


/be back in a few minutes

Why are we having the hottest women in power argument? Because hot women are good leaders?



Because hot women are usually smart?



Hell, if I have a woman leading me, I want her to be a hunchback with uneven boobs, a lazy eye, and a chronic case of halitosis. That ugly cow would get something done, goddamit.

When the Republicans are back in office, and I assure you that they will be and that I had nothing to do with it, I want you to remember these threads... It is riotous when the libs call the freepers juveniles or compare them to toddlers all while acting just as childish.

I swear not one of you on either side of the aisle has a farking lick of common sense.

Tor_Eckman: rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

Your dumb.

Oh man, priceless. Tor_Eckman Total Fark. Tor, would you like to apologise or are you going to be a douche? I don't start 'em but I do finish 'em.

Apologize? You lovingly fellate attention whoring, threadjacking, contrarian troll Philboy and you want me to apologize?

Your a idiot.

Yes, you got on your high and mighty Total Fark horse and called me dumb. The way I was brought, you apologise for things you shouldn't of said or you get punished.

I have not once threadjacked a thread or attentionwhored. Don't even know what a Philboy is?

So are you goig to apoligise?

I'm sorry, I thought you spoke english.

Nevermind.


Thank you for the apology. It takes a man to admit when he is wrong. I hope we can be friends now.

canyoneer: Fart_Machine: "Which is precisely how it should have gone down rather than stealing him away in the middle of the night, forging a letter of resignation, and forcing him into exile in Costa Rica. That's what the controversy is all about and why the international community protested the way he was ousted."

That was all after he was removed from power. As far as I can tell, his removal from power was legally done under Honduran law. Once again, if anyone can provide evidence that his removal from power was unconstitutional, I'll be happy to look at it.

Except that his forced deportation and exile was part of the removal. You can't disassociate one from the other. If they had charges against him he should have been formally arrested and brought to trial. However the court and congress found that would be too messy so they booted him out and declared martial law.

WillyShwonka: Why are we having the hottest women in power argument? Because hot women are good leaders?


Benazir Bhutto comes to mind.




RIP

Russky: "The coup is in violation of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, which was signed in Lima, Peru, in 2001. This charter, affirming defense of democracy in the hemisphere, has been ratified by all member states of the Organization of American States (OAS). Article 9 of the charter specifically addresses coups and the actions to be taken-including suspension from OAS membership-as a result of an illegal takeover of government. Not one government in the Americas has recognized the newly installed government, all citing it as an illegal entity in violation of international law."

Has the OAS produced evidence that Zelaya's removal from office was illegal under Honduran law? Was Zelaya's removal from power unconstitutional under the Honduran constitution? If not, it was not a coup.

rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

Your dumb.

Oh man, priceless. Tor_Eckman Total Fark. Tor, would you like to apologise or are you going to be a douche? I don't start 'em but I do finish 'em.

Apologize? You lovingly fellate attention whoring, threadjacking, contrarian troll Philboy and you want me to apologize?

Your a idiot.

Yes, you got on your high and mighty Total Fark horse and called me dumb. The way I was brought, you apologise for things you shouldn't of said or you get punished.

I have not once threadjacked a thread or attentionwhored. Don't even know what a Philboy is?

So are you goig to apoligise?

I'm sorry, I thought you spoke english.

Nevermind.


Thank you for the apology. It takes a man to admit when he is wrong. I hope we can be friends now.

In your dreams.

Fart_Machine: "Except that his forced deportation and exile was part of the removal. You can't disassociate one from the other. If they had charges against him he should have been formally arrested and brought to trial. However the court and congress found that would be too messy so they booted him out and declared martial law."

OK. Then ship him back to Tegucigalpa (Te-goosey-goosey-galpa, whither dost thou wander?) and let him face the music.

Do you think he'll go back and face charges? I reckon it's even odds he'll "delay his return" indefinitely.

canyoneer: Fart_Machine: "Except that his forced deportation and exile was part of the removal. You can't disassociate one from the other. If they had charges against him he should have been formally arrested and brought to trial. However the court and congress found that would be too messy so they booted him out and declared martial law."

OK. Then ship him back to Tegucigalpa (Te-goosey-goosey-galpa, whither dost thou wander?) and let him face the music.

Do you think he'll go back and face charges? I reckon it's even odds he'll "delay his return" indefinitely.

The last thing the government apparently wants is for his return because he still has lots of popular support. I also wonder just how much of the evidence against him would hold up in a formal trial.

In short there's probably a very good reason why he was suddenly exiled and it has very little to do with the rule of law.

Tor_Eckman: rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: Tor_Eckman: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

Your dumb.

Oh man, priceless. Tor_Eckman Total Fark. Tor, would you like to apologise or are you going to be a douche? I don't start 'em but I do finish 'em.

Apologize? You lovingly fellate attention whoring, threadjacking, contrarian troll Philboy and you want me to apologize?

Your a idiot.

Yes, you got on your high and mighty Total Fark horse and called me dumb. The way I was brought, you apologise for things you shouldn't of said or you get punished.

I have not once threadjacked a thread or attentionwhored. Don't even know what a Philboy is?

So are you goig to apoligise?

I'm sorry, I thought you spoke english.

Nevermind.


Thank you for the apology. It takes a man to admit when he is wrong. I hope we can be friends now.

In your dreams.


Man, I'm holding out hope that you'll come around. You and I are not that differant really.

canyoneer: Has the OAS produced evidence that Zelaya's removal from office was illegal under Honduran law? Was Zelaya's removal from power unconstitutional under the Honduran constitution?

Article 69: A persons liberty is inviolable and can only be restricted or suspended temporarily through process of law.

Article 71: No person can be arrested nor kept incommunicado for more than 24 hours without being placed before a competent authority to be judged. Judicial detention during an investigation must not exceed six consecutive days from the moment that the same is ordered.

Article 78: Freedoms of association and meeting are always guaranteed when they are not contrary to public order and good customs.

Article 79: All persons have the right to meet with others, peacefully and without weapons, in public demonstration or transitory assembly, in relation to their common interests of any type, without necessity of notice or special permission.

Article 81: "ll persons have the right to circulate freely, leave, enter, and remain in national territory. No one can be obligated to change home or residence except in special cases and with those requirements that the Law establishes.

Is that good enough? Please, if you can, show the details of the legal procedure that was carried out prior to the arrest and deportation.

Davey Croquette: compared to some of the idiot trolls who post shiat that is meant to do nothing but inflame and usually has no basis in reality.

WTF do you care what they post. That's like saying you don't like what's on a billboard. Don't read it. And if you accidentally read it, forget about it. It's words on a page. They won't hurt you.

Of course not. But I don't need to waste my time looking at gibberish, if there's an easy way to avoid gibberish.

rastjr: Man, I'm holding out hope that you'll come around. You and I are not that differant really.


Don't lose any sleep over that colostomy bag. I doubt you'll want to be that much like him

Just some advice, take it for what it is worth.

UnspokenVoice: When the Republicans are back in office, and I assure you that they will be and that I had nothing to do with it...

16 years from now. Maybe. There's a big wad of people of voting age who only know Republicanism as the Bush years. That's not a good endorsement for the GOP.

rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

There are some really stupid people on this site.

Phil Herup: rastjr: Man, I'm holding out hope that you'll come around. You and I are not that differant really.


Don't lose any sleep over that colostomy bag. I doubt you'll want to be that much like him

Just some advice, take it for what it is worth.


Thanks dude.

Tor's a douche, huh?

CynicalLA: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

There are some really stupid people on this site.

I agree. :)

rastjr: CynicalLA: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

There are some really stupid people on this site.

I agree. :)

I was talking about you. Phil is a troll and he is only trying to get a rise out of people. The fact that you respect him says a lot about you.

Fart_Machine: "The last thing the government apparently wants is for his return because he still has lots of popular support. I also wonder just how much of the evidence against him would hold up in a formal trial. In short there's probably a very good reason why he was suddenly exiled and it has very little to do with the rule of law."

Well, you don't know any of that to be true. From what I've read, his popular support had dropped like a rock in the last year, and most Hondurans are happy to see his back. Evidently, the evidence against him was good enough for for his own political party, the majority of the Congress, the attorney general, and the supreme court.

I find this story to be fascinating on several levels, but I'm willing to be persuaded by solid evidence that the impeachment of Zelaya was illegal under the Honduran constitution. Some people evidently want to believe it's all a terrible military putsch because of their personal leanings.

My personal preference is for the sovereignty of nations to be respected, so I'm not going to condemn the Hondurans until I see solid proof that this was an illegal action by the Honduran government. So far, I haven't seen that, so I'm not going to pass judgement on the Hondurans. If there is no proof forthcoming that the Honduran government acted illegally in the matter of deposing this crackpot presidente, I say the OAS and EU and UN and Obama should butt out of internal Honduran affairs, STFU, and GBTW on their own multitudinous problems. The real test will come in November, when the next round of elections is scheduled. If those are fair and open, I'd say this whole thing will have been much ado about nothing.

You know, I don't even dispute that Latin American governments and societies are in need of reform and even restructuring. I've said countless times in Fark forums that the terrible legacy of the encomienda system should be erased, and power and money more equitably distributed. At first, I even thought Hugo Chavez might be a breath of fresh air, but now I see he and his compadres are merely a new generation of power-hungry caudillos spouting a different line of bullsh*t who will do no more to reform their societies than their predecessors.

Exchanging one form of oppression for another will solve nothing. The campesinos of Latin America will be no better off under a lot of swaggering socialist caudillos than they've been under a lot of swaggering capitalist caudillos.

God's Hubris: Another hideous Democrat woman:


/be back in a few minutes

Minutes? I'm done already!

jules_siegel: "Is that good enough?"

Which article provides for emergencies to be declared? Undoubtedly it's in there.

Can you disprove this reportage of events in Honduras?

Link (new window)

I presume you're quoting the Honduran constitution verbatim. Can you provide a link to that, please?

CynicalLA: rastjr: CynicalLA: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

There are some really stupid people on this site.

I agree. :)

I was talking about you. Phil is a troll and he is only trying to get a rise out of people. The fact that you respect him says a lot about you.

rastjr is a troll too.

CynicalLA: rastjr: CynicalLA: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

There are some really stupid people on this site.

I agree. :)

I was talking about you. Phil is a troll and he is only trying to get a rise out of people. The fact that you respect him says a lot about you.


I was talking about you. Man, you're not very bright.

Phil Herup: eraser8: Right wing satirical images are never funny. Never. They are never insightful. They are never well done.

Translation: "Na na na na na na ... I can't hear you."

Phil Herup: Perfect example of the classic " No U!" response.




Yet another example of Phil Herup blaming others for doing exactly what he does.

I don't know why you keep coming back for more, but god bless you for it.



Roll on, short bus, roll on.

tedbundee: CynicalLA: rastjr: CynicalLA: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

There are some really stupid people on this site.

I agree. :)

I was talking about you. Phil is a troll and he is only trying to get a rise out of people. The fact that you respect him says a lot about you.

rastjr is a troll too.

That explains why they get along.

rastjr: CynicalLA: rastjr: CynicalLA: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

There are some really stupid people on this site.

I agree. :)

I was talking about you. Phil is a troll and he is only trying to get a rise out of people. The fact that you respect him says a lot about you.


I was talking about you. Man, you're not very bright.

I know you are, but what am I? You are clever.

Davey Croquette: compared to some of the idiot trolls who post shiat that is meant to do nothing but inflame and usually has no basis in reality.

WTF do you care what they post. That's like saying you don't like what's on a billboard. Don't read it. And if you accidentally read it, forget about it. It's words on a page. They won't hurt you.

I don't care what they post, that's why i ignore them.

Of course it has nothing to do with them disagreeing with me, which was the point of your original post. It has to do with them providing nothing based in reality. I enjoy debates with someone that can actually 'debate' and not just be an idiot.

Take for instance Canyoneer in this post, I disagree with what he's saying, BUT he is doing so in a mature manner not being a troll so it is actually a good discussion and someone i wouldn't ignore.

You moved the goal posts......typical of people who can't back up what they say.

canyoneer: Fart_Machine: "The last thing the government apparently wants is for his return because he still has lots of popular support. I also wonder just how much of the evidence against him would hold up in a formal trial. In short there's probably a very good reason why he was suddenly exiled and it has very little to do with the rule of law."

Well, you don't know any of that to be true. From what I've read, his popular support had dropped like a rock in the last year, and most Hondurans are happy to see his back. Evidently, the evidence against him was good enough for for his own political party, the majority of the Congress, the attorney general, and the supreme court.

I find this story to be fascinating on several levels, but I'm willing to be persuaded by solid evidence that the impeachment of Zelaya was illegal under the Honduran constitution. Some people evidently want to believe it's all a terrible military putsch because of their personal leanings..

I don't think it's black and white which is part of the problem. It may be that it was legal of them to vote him out, or that may have been a 'symbolic' vote but not based on any type of law, i don't know. I'd be interested to see if this is a normal legal type of vote for them.

That being said, the deportation after the fact is not legal from what I've read. Some of the other stories of the 'crackdowns' and police brutality make me think that there is more going on behind the scenes than we think. Of course it's hard to verify these stories.

canyoneer: Can you disprove this reportage of events in Honduras?

Read the article comments. He neglects to mention the OAS, a non-radical entity, has condemned the action as a coup. Nor does he mention that basic civil rights have now been suspended in Honduras, which would hardly seem necessary if the coup had any real popular support, not to speak of what it says about the leaders' respect for their country's constitution.

I presume you're quoting the Honduran constitution verbatim. Can you provide a link to that, please?

I'm sure you can find it yourself. Maybe you might look for a report on the legal procedures that were followed. Please don't bother me with further requests for documentation until you do that. Your case has no merit without it.

Take for instance Canyoneer in this post, I disagree with what he's saying, BUT he is doing so in a mature manner not being a troll
Funny, considering Canyoneer is my oldest and trolliest of alts.

why is it that all the extremist nationalist loon sites have names that include words like "think" and "world" and "progress".... and "fox"?

Russky: "I don't think it's black and white which is part of the problem. It may be that it was legal of them to vote him out, or that may have been a 'symbolic' vote but not based on any type of law, i don't know. I'd be interested to see if this is a normal legal type of vote for them. That being said, the deportation after the fact is not legal from what I've read. Some of the other stories of the 'crackdowns' and police brutality make me think that there is more going on behind the scenes than we think. Of course it's hard to verify these stories."

It could also be that the Honduran constitution does not contain specific provisions for the impeachment and removal of the chief executive. In that case, it would be up to the congress and supreme court to hammer out a procedure on the spot, as it were.

(As an aside, in yesterday's thread and again today, there are Farkers ostensibly quoting the Honduran constitution verbatim, yet won't post a link to it when asked. I tried to find it in English online, but was unsuccessful.)

I agree that it appears that the deportation was illegal, according to the attorney general quoted in the Miami Herald article posted by DarnoKonrad. However, that doesn't imply that stripping him of the presidency was illegal.

As far as the unrest is concerned, I have read differing reports, and it's impossible to verify what's going on. It's widely reported that Zelaya's support eroded substantially over the last year, but that doesn't mean he has no supporters. There are also repeated reports of pro-Micheletti demonstrators. Link (new window) So, it is impossible from afar to verify the level of popular support for either side. That emergency measures have been instituted could mean that there is repression of popular anger going on, or it could mean that a violent minority is trying to disrupt normal goings-on, like something on the order of the Seattle WTO riots in '99. There is no way to know at this point.

As I've said repeatedly, I willing to look at whatever evidence and reports as can be provided, but I'm not going to call this a "coup" based on what I've seen so far.

jules_siegel: "I'm sure you can find it yourself."

Put up or shut up. Yesterday and today, I've provided links to all the available information and reportage and asked repeatedly for contradictory, verifiable information. If you can't cite your information, I'll assume it's crap until proven otherwise.

canyoneer: or it could mean that a violent minority is trying to disrupt normal goings-on, like something on the order of the Seattle WTO riots in '99.

You mean the one that resulted in a suspension of civil rights, media blackout, arrests of cabinet ministers? Yeah. Sure sounds like that one.

canyoneer: Put up or shut up. Yesterday and today, I've provided links to all the available information and reportage

You haven't supplied any links to the legal procedures that were carried out prior to the arrest. Maybe that's because there aren't any.

and asked repeatedly for contradictory, verifiable information. If you can't cite your information, I'll assume it's crap until proven otherwise.

CONSTITUCION POLITICA DE LA REPUBLICA DE HONDURAS DE 1982

Incluye Reformas de 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 y 2005.

Actualizada hasta el Decreto 36 del 4 de Mayo de 2005
(new window)

I assume you read Spanish as fluently as I do, since you're such an expert on Honduras.

jules_siegel: Where and when did Zelaya violate this provision? Please be specific, and cite his exact words and deeds.

"Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform"

A non-binding resolution is a proposal for reform. Are you denying he was asking for it?

You keep asking for specifics, and citations for exact words, yet you have failed to do the same when challenged. If the constitution is vague or unclear on hwo to remove someone from office the body that decides if how they did it is legal is the Supreme court. So unless you have some exact verbiage that says they were supposed to do it X way and they did not, what they did to arrest and remove him from power was legal.

jules_siegel:
CONSTITUCION POLITICA DE LA REPUBLICA DE HONDURAS DE 1982

Incluye Reformas de 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 y 2005.

Actualizada hasta el Decreto 36 del 4 de Mayo de 2005
(new window)

So once again the only clear violation of the constitutiont hat took place was the presidnet violating article 139.

People have linked to it and translated it specifically, as you requested, and you repeatedly fail to do the same for your "legal" argument that the the supreme court and every memeber of congress acted in an unconstitutional manner.

canyoneer:
Well, you don't know any of that to be true.

If that was the case then his referendum would have failed at the polls and he could have been ousted as a lame duck in November. There would have been no need to use the military to force him unto a plane and exile him in Costa Rica nor would there be any need for suppression of demonstrations with martial law.

Some people evidently want to believe it's all a terrible military putsch because of their personal leanings.

Some people would like to believe expulsion without charges or a trial was justified because of their personal leanings.

If there is no proof forthcoming that the Honduran government acted illegally in the matter of deposing this crackpot presidente, I say the OAS and EU and UN and Obama should butt out of internal Honduran affairs, STFU, and GBTW on their own multitudinous problems.

Given that they're a US client state we really can't.

Exchanging one form of oppression for another will solve nothing.

I agree. He should have had his day on public trial instead of using the Supreme Court and Congress serving as a Star Chamber to stage a coup.

Fart_Machine: If that was the case then his referendum would have failed at the polls and he could have been ousted as a lame duck in November. There would have been no need to use the military to force him unto a plane and exile him in Costa Rica nor would there be any need for suppression of demonstrations with martial law.

even having that referendum violated the constitution.

Fart_Machine: I agree. He should have had his day on public trial instead of using the Supreme Court and Congress serving as a Star Chamber to stage a coup.

There is nothing to indicate that removing someone from power in Honduras requires a two step process like in the US.

The supreme court ruled he violated the constitution. The article he violated is pretty clear abotu what happens next. Arresting him may have crossed the line (although that is the safest way to remove someone from power) tossing him out probably did cross the line.

However those are all after the fact. They occured after he was removed from power. So even if they were done improperly, it doesn't mean his removal from power was improper. If his removal from power wasn't improper, it wasn't a coup. Overzealous, poorly planned, and ill conceived maybe, but not a coup.

CynicalLA: rastjr: CynicalLA: rastjr: CynicalLA: rastjr: People that use the ignore button are missing out on the whole experience of Fark.

Ask Phil Herup. We don't agree on anything but we have learned to respect each other. He might be the coolest dude on here.

There are some really stupid people on this site.

I agree. :)

I was talking about you. Phil is a troll and he is only trying to get a rise out of people. The fact that you respect him says a lot about you.


I was talking about you. Man, you're not very bright.

I know you are, but what am I? You are clever.


Thanks, I knew you would come around eventually.

Mordant: Maybe we need someone to flood the queue every single day with literally every article on Kos, and then in every single one we can issue a challenge that conservatives HAVE to respond to it or else they are cowards.

Yeah, maybe that's how Fark should be.

It's pretty much like that already. At this moment on the Politics page I see seven different Kos articles. Because links to opinion pieces about other links are so interesting.

Robert1966: The Honduran president was trying to hold an unconstitutional referendum.

But if you then remove him from power in a coup instead of impeaching him according to the Honduran constitution, which one is the greater violation of the rule of law?

I'm not saying the answer is obvious, but it's not a shock that a leader in the United States would consider the forced exile of a head of state a bit less legitimate than an illegitimate referendum.

Indeed, the referendum was probably unconstitutional, but as long as the president 1. didn't win it and 2. tried to implement an eventual positive result, he hadn't violated it yet.

And even if he had, that wouldn't justify a coup.

Note that De Gaulle did exactly that in 1958; the Vth Republic was adopted in a referendum, where the IVth didn't allow such a thing.

liam76: People have linked to it and translated it specifically, as you requested, and you repeatedly fail to do the same for your "legal" argument that the the supreme court and every memeber of congress acted in an unconstitutional manner.

I don't have to prove that. All you have to do is show that there was due process. If there was, there will be a record of it. If not...

Until then, I'll rely on the findings of organizations and institutions that are expert in these matters -- all of whom, apparently, agree that it was a coup.

Thanks for the entertainment. You guys put up a good show, but it's not very convincing. You're quite legalistic about everything until you come up against a clear violation such as beating him up and deporting him. Then it's just a minor irregularity. I'm sure you'll feel the same way when the police rough you up and kick you out of your own country for some political error you might make.

One last thing, you keep talking about Article 139, but you fail to show concretely how he violated it -- presumably because he didn't. Where did he propose extending his term? Where did he say that the Constituent Assembly would consider that issue? Since when is a non-binding poll considered a legal referendum?

If you want to get all legalistic, I'd think you would have the answers to those questions handy, seeing how it is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove the defendant's guilt.

June 24, 2009 The Honduran Congress passed a new law on Tuesday, after an unusual late-night legislative session. The measure, called the Ley Especial que Regula el Referéndum y el Plebiscito, establishes specific restrictions on the power of the executive to call for national referendums by prohibiting plebiscites and referendums 180 days before or after a national election. Prior to Tuesday's development, President Zelaya had scheduled a vote for June 28 on whether to convene a constituent assembly to re-write the Honduran Constitution. Plans for the referendum provoked widespread criticism throughout Honduras, and were declared illegal by the Supreme Court, the Attorney General and the Human Rights Ombudsman, but President Zelaya vowed to press forward with the vote. Zelaya has argued that social problems in Honduras are rooted in its current constitution. But opponents are worried that constitutional changes in other Latin American countries have eased re-election restrictions, expanded presidential powers and extended term limits. Opponents also argue the president is trying to pave the way for his own re-election. Zelaya's four-year term ends in early 2010 and current law requires him to step down. (new window)

24/6/2009 - 17:29(GMT) Según el proyecto del presidente, si la respuesta es afirmativa, se instalará una cuarta urna en las elecciones del 29 de noviembre en la que se decidirá la convocatoria a una asamblea constituyente que redacte una nueva constitución que permita la reelección presidencial o ampliar el periodo del Gobierno. (new window)

(Google translation)

According to the draft of the president, if the answer is yes, fourth box installed in the elections on November 29 to decide on convening a constituent assembly to draft a new constitution to allow presidential re-election or extend the period Government.

So, Zelaya did, indeed propose to extend his own term, as reported elsewhere, and proposed specifically that such an option be placed on the November ballot. Oops.

jules_siegel: "You haven't supplied any links to the legal procedures that were carried out prior to the arrest. Maybe that's because there aren't any. CONSTITUCION POLITICA DE LA REPUBLICA DE HONDURAS DE 1982 Incluye Reformas de 1982, 1984, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 y 2005. Actualizada hasta el Decreto 36 del 4 de Mayo de 2005 - I assume you read Spanish as fluently as I do, since you're such an expert on Honduras."

See above for links (previous post) to specific events in Honduras prior to the removal of Zelaya. There's a wealth of information there - in Spanish and English.

My Spanish isn't what it used to be because I haven't used it in many years, but I grew up bilingual in New Mexico, if you must know.

Anyone can find the Spanish version online, but I'd guess most Farkers don't speak Spanish. This is an English language forum. You need to post English language links.

Obama has shown we don't judge a man by the company he keeps.

Here's to you Mr. Eli Black. A man from a time before "golden parachutes".

/obscure?

Jackpot777:
Conservative Internet Tough Guys: hope for a Liberal judge because in their hearts they know where truth and fairness really reside.

Is your sarcasm meter broken today? That's pretty clearly a sarcastic jab on the part of the criminal about liberal judges always letting criminals off easy.

canyoneer: See above for links (previous post) to specific events in Honduras prior to the removal of Zelaya. There's a wealth of information there - in Spanish and English.

My Spanish isn't what it used to be because I haven't used it in many years, but I grew u

Fair enough. Now what were the legal procedures that were carried out to deport him?

canyoneer: 24/6/2009 - 17:29(GMT) Según el proyecto del presidente, si la respuesta es afirmativa, se instalará una cuarta urna en las elecciones del 29 de noviembre en la que se decidirá la convocatoria a una asamblea constituyente que redacte una nueva constitución que permita la reelección presidencial o ampliar el periodo del Gobierno. (new window)

(Google translation)

According to the draft of the president, if the answer is yes, fourth box installed in the elections on November 29 to decide on convening a constituent assembly to draft a new constitution to allow presidential re-election or extend the period Government.

The translation is incorrect. Proyecto is not a draft but a plan. A draft is un borrador. I'm going to write something about this (assuming it does check out) and I need to know where Zelaya specifically said that the new constitution would allow presidential re-election or extension of the period of government.

The way the article reads, this is an assertion of the author. The actual item in the poll (not referendum) simply says:

"¿Está usted de acuerdo que en las elecciones generales de noviembre de 2009 se instale una cuarta urna para decidir sobre la convocatoria a una asamblea nacional constituyente que apruebe una constitución política?"

"Do you agree that a fourth ballot box be installed in the general elections of November 2009 to decide on convoking a national constituent assembly to enact a constitution?"

I'm sure that you can understand that I would need to have more than that. If Zelaya is not on record as having proposed extending the presidential term, then he was not subject to removal under Article 139.

The law forbidding the circulation of the referendum does not appear to have been constitutional, as it would have been an infringement of free speech. Violating it would not be the basis of removing the president from office, because as far as I can tell the constitution does not provide for presidential removal aside from Article 139. If I am wrong about that, correct me, and tell me the procedure.

I live in Mexico, where the statement "Effective voting. No re-election." appears under the signature of every official communication, even the letter I received approving my residence. Trial balloons about enabling re-election have aroused immense controversies here and have been hastily denied by the powers that be.

Now, I am taking you very seriously, and I will be happy to credit you in anything I write about this, so please do your best to track down Zelaya's statements about amending the constitution to extend his term or allow his re-election. Meanwhile, I'll see what I can find out on my own.

liam76: Clarence Potter: Actually, no I cannot, and this is the sheer stupidity of their argument and I suppose (by extension) yours: They're safe-guarding the democratic institutuions of Honduras by blanking power, muffling the media, and doing all of this in secret? Do you honestly believe that? If their actions had the full sanction of the HSC, the Congress, the Attorney General, the Human Rights Ombudsman, and grandma; why not arrange for this in the light of day where you have, say, the AG announcing this LEGAL procedure over the airwaves while the Military detains the man (detains, not exiles), while the Congress appoints a new leader for the country? Which has the greater weight of legitimacy both in the eyes of the average Honduran and the world at large?

Did you follow th enews leading up to this?

Mobs of people were breaking into military bases. The President was dismissing people he had no authority to. If you can't see how publicly saying the military was going to arrest him before hand might have caused more bloodshed I am going to have to ask the person typing for you to try and draw some pictures to explain because I don't have the patience. Just because it wasn't public before hand doesn't make it illegal.

As far as what would have looked more legit, I agree, but maybe saving lives was more important than making it look good.

At this point with news coming out I am not discounting th epossibility of it being a coup. I just think it is a little irresponsible to level that charge at this point.

Liam, if you were a woman I would make you my second wife. My thoughts exactly. This version of events seems by far the most likely regardless of what the 40 members of the OAS say. I am also so surprised that so many people don't understand that military involvement doesn't make it a coup.

jules_siegel: canyoneer: 24/6/2009 - 17:29(GMT) Según el proyecto del presidente, si la respuesta es afirmativa, se instalará una cuarta urna en las elecciones del 29 de noviembre en la que se decidirá la convocatoria a una asamblea constituyente que redacte una nueva constitución que permita la reelección presidencial o ampliar el periodo del Gobierno. (new window)

(Google translation)

According to the draft of the president, if the answer is yes, fourth box installed in the elections on November 29 to decide on convening a constituent assembly to draft a new constitution to allow presidential re-election or extend the period Government.

The translation is incorrect. Proyecto is not a draft but a plan. A draft is un borrador. I'm going to write something about this (assuming it does check out) and I need to know where Zelaya specifically said that the new constitution would allow presidential re-election or extension of the period of government.

The way the article reads, this is an assertion of the author. The actual item in the poll (not referendum) simply says:

"¿Está usted de acuerdo que en las elecciones generales de noviembre de 2009 se instale una cuarta urna para decidir sobre la convocatoria a una asamblea nacional constituyente que apruebe una constitución política?"

"Do you agree that a fourth ballot box be installed in the general elections of November 2009 to decide on convoking a national constituent assembly to enact a constitution?"


I'm sure that you can understand that I would need to have more than that. If Zelaya is not on record as having proposed extending the presidential term, then he was not subject to removal under Article 139.

The law forbidding the circulation of the referendum does not appear to have been constitutional, as it would have been an infringement of free speech. Violating it would not be the basis of removing the president from office, because as far as I can tell the constitution does not provide for presidential removal aside from Article 139. If I am wrong about that, correct me, and tell me the procedure.

I live in Mexico, where the statement "Effective voting. No re-election." appears under the signature of every official communication, even the letter I received approving my residence. Trial balloons about enabling re-election have aroused immense controversies here and have been hastily denied by the powers that be.

Now, I am taking you very seriously, and I will be happy to credit you in anything I write about this, so please do your best to track down Zelaya's statements about amending the constitution to extend his term or allow his re-election. Meanwhile, I'll see what I can find out on my own.

You've missed the problem completely. Read Article 5. Before any 'consultation' can be made with the voters, 2/3 of Congress must approve. That doesn't mean they have to propose it, but any question other than the ordinary, 'who will be your representative next year?' type question must be approved by 2/3 of Congress before going to be voted on. Zelaya skipped that step.

GentDirkly: You've missed the problem completely. Read Article 5. Before any 'consultation' can be made with the voters, 2/3 of Congress must approve. That doesn't mean they have to propose it, but any question other than the ordinary, 'who will be your representative next year?' type question must be approved by 2/3 of Congress before going to be voted on. Zelaya skipped that step.

Consulta refers to plebiscites and referendums, which are defined earlier in the article as instruments to be voted on. An encuesta is an opinion poll, not a referendum or plebiscite. It has no legal effect of any kind. Many reports I've read point out that the poll -- which was to be carried out by the National Institute of Statistics ^a -- was non-binding, even when they refer to it incorrectly as a referendum. Proposition 8 was a referendum. It had the effect of law. Zelaya's poll was an opinion gathering study. It had no legal effect whatsoever.

If Congress wished to prohibit it legally, they should have used encuesta in the title of the law instead of Ley Especial que Reglamenta el Plebiscito y el Referendum. They didn't do that because it would have presumably violated constitutional guarantees of free speech.

Incidentally, although I've been using poll for encuesta, a better translation would be survey.

Juan Almendares, a Honduran medical doctor and award-winning human rights activist, and president of the Honduran Peace Committee, said on Democracy Now (new window), "What we are looking [at] now is, we are going back to [a] repressive situation. Some of the advisers of the [new] government have been perpetrators, torture perpetrators, of the 1980s. Some of these people think like Pinochet, and they are comparing Zelaya with Salvador Allende. And we have here in Honduras a different situation. We have a government who were doing not a referendum; they were doing just a survey, a simple survey, to ask people whether they want to have a constitutional reform. But we have an alliance between the very powerful class in this country [and] the military."

I think that hair-splitting discussions of Honduras constitutional law have now become absurdly irrelevant, given the current suspension of civil rights in Honduras, and reported arrests of cabinet ministers, diplomats and other public figures.

GentDirkly: military involvement doesn't make it a coup.

It's not military involvement that makes it a coup, but the apparent lack of any due process, beating Zelaya up, reported arrests of cabinet ministers, suspension of civil rights, and all the other characteristics of a coup. Approval after the fact by congress and courts doesn't change any of that. Who authorized Zelaya's detention and deportation? Where are the written orders to that effect? What was their legal basis, if any?

As you've seen, I've been quite serious about considering the issues. Now be serious about finding the answers to my questions.

The Obamessiah just wants their to be peace in our time. And he isn't going to let any constitution or Iranian college student get in the way of his morally relativistic cockpolishing of tyrants.

nictamer: the referendum was probably unconstitutional

Except it wasn't a referendum. It was a survey. See my points above.

jules_siegel: GentDirkly: military involvement doesn't make it a coup.

It's not military involvement that makes it a coup, but the apparent lack of any due process, beating Zelaya up, reported arrests of cabinet ministers, suspension of civil rights, and all the other characteristics of a coup. Approval after the fact by congress and courts doesn't change any of that. Who authorized Zelaya's detention and deportation? Where are the written orders to that effect? What was their legal basis, if any?

As you've seen, I've been quite serious about considering the issues. Now be serious about finding the answers to my questions.

The Chamber of Deputies in Chilea claimed their coup was legal as well by accusing Allende of violating the Constitution. Just sayin'.

jules_siegel:

I think that hair-splitting discussions of Honduras constitutional law have now become absurdly irrelevant, given the current suspension of civil rights in Honduras, and reported arrests of cabinet ministers, diplomats and other public figures.

If there has been a suspension of civil rights intended to last more than a few days, and arrests of people like diplomats and cabinet ministers without charge, then it follows that our splitting hairs on the Constitution is absurd. But neither of us know that for sure, and here we have the OAS claiming to know for sure. It is disturbing.

No one disputes that Zelaya's people were mobbing military bases to recover these ballots. No one disputes that the Supreme Court found Zelaya to be in violation of the Constitution for not only the vote ('survey' whatever) but also for removing a general without cause. No one disputes that the Congress had the authority to remove Zelaya at a moment's notice for any reason with a 2/3 vote. Does that prove everything was done legitimately? No. Are there other facts that point to it not being legitimate? Yes. But why are these other heads of state, including Obama, acting with so much certainty about it all?

I am not saying that I am certain. I am saying everyone should have waited for proof of bad behavior to be provided by the actors. We had every voice crying coup within 24 hours and that was a huge mistake. Both sides in Honduras, because of this, are under such an amount of outside pressure that the truth may never surface.

jules_siegel: GentDirkly: military involvement doesn't make it a coup.

It's not military involvement that makes it a coup, but the apparent lack of any due process, beating Zelaya up, reported arrests of cabinet ministers, suspension of civil rights, and all the other characteristics of a coup. Approval after the fact by congress and courts doesn't change any of that. Who authorized Zelaya's detention and deportation? Where are the written orders to that effect? What was their legal basis, if any?

As you've seen, I've been quite serious about considering the issues. Now be serious about finding the answers to my questions.

I don't view your claim that Zelaya was beaten to be serious. The man spoke to the UN on Tuesday in the presence of journalists from around the world. There was no mention of this in the articles I read.

The Congress of Honduras is required to appoint a 10-member standing committee to act in emergencies when a quorum is not available. The committee temporarily holds all powers. I believe this is in Article 205 but I'm not sure. Only 7 of these 10 had to agree, in the middle of the night, for the ouster to be legal. The thing speaks for itself: a standing committees is designed to act in emergency situations, there is often not time to file all papers, and ten people is few enough for a show of hands.

I have not proven this was legitimate, just that anyone who is sure that it wasn't legitimate with the evidence available to the public is not thinking right.

Fart_Machine:
The Chamber of Deputies in Chile claimed their coup was legal as well by accusing Allende of violating the Constitution. Just sayin'.

It might have been legal. It's their fault for not having a well thought-out impeachment procedure. We can argue that Pinochet's subsequent doings were illegal under the Geneva Convention, if Chile was a signatory to that, but only the other two branches of government in any democratic republic, either the courts or legislature, can rightly judge if a change in the executive branch was done the right way. It is not for other countries to decide.

GentDirkly: Fart_Machine:
The Chamber of Deputies in Chile claimed their coup was legal as well by accusing Allende of violating the Constitution. Just sayin'.

It might have been legal. It's their fault for not having a well thought-out impeachment procedure. We can argue that Pinochet's subsequent doings were illegal under the Geneva Convention, if Chile was a signatory to that, but only the other two branches of government in any democratic republic, either the courts or legislature, can rightly judge if a change in the executive branch was done the right way. It is not for other countries to decide.

I don't know any rational person who wouldn't consider what happend in Chile a coup. However the victors (who happen to be members of the same government) certainly will defend their actions as legal. By your standard there is no such thing as a coup because the host powers will never admit it.

Outside powers and certainly those in Central America know what a coup looks like. Regardless of whether the court or congress thought was the "right" thing to do, that is precisely what they did.

Didn't the Honduran Supreme Court order the army to remove the president since he was illegally holding onto power? If that is true, then it wasn't a coup.

Ah, yes, posting a series of deliberate lies and calling yourself a "thinker" for doing it.

OgreMagi: Didn't the Honduran Supreme Court order the army to remove the president since he was illegally holding onto power? If that is true, then it wasn't a coup.

His term wasn't up until January. No one disputes that he was democratically elected. The Supreme Court doesn't have the power to order the military to remove the President, and they certainly don't have the power to do that just because he was demanding a non-binding poll over whether or not to hold a constitutional convention (which is all he had done at the time of his removal).

Not that you would know ANY of this be watching the American media "covering" it.

It was an illegal coup, even if the guy is a dipshiat. The US cannot sanction that kind of thing, even if the outcome is to our liking.

liam76: even having that referendum violated the constitution.

Then they could have simply stopped the referendum or declared any result of it null and void. That's what a Supreme Court is SUPPOSED to do.

Ordering a military junta to remove him before his term was over is NOT.

Hell, the Congress even tried to forge a letter of resignation from him. You may like the outcome, but you cannot reasonably claim that his removal was on the up and up.

All they had to do was wait six months. Then they could have thrown his ass out if he didn't leave office.

But they didn't want to wait, so they took illegal action.

GentDirkly: No one disputes that the Supreme Court found Zelaya to be in violation of the Constitution for not only the vote ('survey' whatever)

You disappoint me. A survey is not a referendum. That's not semantics. There was no voting on the survey, because it wasn't a legal referendum or plebiscite with official ballots carried out by an electoral body. Please explain how the National Institute of Statistics can carry out a referendum. Expressing an opinion is not voting. You have to fudge that issue because without it you have absolutely no case at all.

but also for removing a general without cause.

When were these edicts issued? When did the Supreme Court issue any edict ordering the Army to remove Zelaya from power and eject him from the country? Where in the constitution is the Supreme Court authorized to remove a sitting president and for what cause?

I really find it astonishing that you indulge in legalism but fail to cite any precedents, regulations or statutes. No one has yet actually demonstrated that Zelaya ever made a single statement about reelection. There's nothing in the survey about it, is there?

I am going to be really blunt here. This is the usual right wing horse pucky. You haven't got any facts of law on your side, so you resort to distortion, implication and outright lies. You aren't serious about this. You are promoting propaganda.

I think that what happened is that they were terrified of any constituent assembly not because of the possibility of reelection but because of other far more serious issues. From the way Article 139 is written, it doesn't seem that even a constituent assembly could modify term limits.

That should be Article 239.

Prospero424: liam76: even having that referendum violated the constitution.

Then they could have simply stopped the referendum or declared any result of it null and void. That's what a Supreme Court is SUPPOSED to do.

Ordering a military junta to remove him before his term was over is NOT.

Hell, the Congress even tried to forge a letter of resignation from him. You may like the outcome, but you cannot reasonably claim that his removal was on the up and up.

Read article 239. They couldn't just stop it or declare it void. They had to remove the person behind the change from office.


jules_siegel: You disappoint me. A survey is not a referendum. That's not semantics. There was no voting on the survey, because it wasn't a legal referendum or plebiscite with official ballots carried out by an electoral body. Please explain how the National Institute of Statistics can carry out a referendum. Expressing an opinion is not voting. You have to fudge that issue because without it you have absolutely no case at all.

Re-read 239.

This is the translation you posted earlier.

jules_siegel: Article 239 - No citizen that has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President.

Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.

It doesn't have to be a binding vote to violate the constitution.

liam76: Read article 239. They couldn't just stop it or declare it void. They had to remove the person behind the change from office.

Except for one simple fact that you keep ignoring. He did not propose re-election or extending the term. I've now asked on more than one occasion for evidence that he did and you have failed to provide it.

The encuesta -- survey -- did not propose it either. It merely asked for an opinion on calling a constitutional assembly. Since the actual ballot on that would appear in the November election it could in no way affect Zelaya's term as president, which ends in January when the new president is elected.

You insist on calling the survey a referendum, but that doesn't make it one. A referendum in Spanish is un referéndum or referendo, and it is specified in the Honduras constitution in Article 5, along with plebiscite. To carry out a referendum, it has to be on a ballot in a voting process. An encuesta does nbot satisfay any of these definitions.

You seem to have a problem with simple dictionary definitions. Your argument is based entirely on word games. Now show me the evidence for Zelaya having proposed a change in the constitution covered under Article 239 or please just shut up and go away.

Obama. What can we say?

I think he's in way over his head. He's already got more gray hairs than his first day of office. This man is gonna look like shiat at the end of his first term.

Will he get re-elected? I dunno about you all, but I'm getting sick of 2 term Presidents.

But the Union will probably dissolve by 2012 anyways, so it's really just a hypothetical question at this point.

jules_siegel:
Except for one simple fact that you keep ignoring. He did not propose re-election or extending the term. I've now asked on more than one occasion for evidence that he did and you have failed to provide it.

The encuesta -- survey -- did not propose it either. It merely asked for an opinion on calling a constitutional assembly. Since the actual ballot on that would appear in the November election it could in no way affect Zelaya's term as president, which ends in January when the new president is elected.

You insist on calling the survey a referendum, but that doesn't make it one. A referendum in Spanish is un referéndum or referendo, and it is specified in the Honduras constitution in Article 5, along with plebiscite. To carry out a referendum, it has to be on a ballot in a voting process. An encuesta does nbot satisfay any of these definitions.

You seem to have a problem with simple dictionary definitions. Your argument is based entirely on word games. Now show me the evidence for Zelaya having proposed a change in the constitution covered under Article 239 or please just shut up and go away.

'Encuesta' doesn't appear in the constitution of Honduras. I don't know if you came up with that word or Zelaya, but it reminds me of a soccer player saying, 'oh no no I'm not touching the ball with my hands, I'm merely tapping it'.

GentDirkly:

'Encuesta' doesn't appear in the constitution of Honduras. I don't know if you came up with that word or Zelaya, but it reminds me of a soccer player saying, 'oh no no I'm not touching the ball with my hands, I'm merely tapping it'.

That's right. It doesn't. Therefore it is not covered by the article on referendums and plebiscites. The exact term used in Article 2 of the decree is "encuesta de opinion publica." ^ Encuesta is a standard Spanish term for survey. It's not an official legal proposition with voting by ballot. Proposition 8 was a referendum. The polls about Proposition 8 were opinion surveys.

Zelaya "invoked article 5 of the Honduran "Civil Participation Act" of 2006. According to this act, all public functionaries can perform non-binding public consultations to inquire what the population thinks about policy measures. This act was approved by the National Congress and it was not contested by the Supreme Court of Justice, when it was published in the Official Paper of 2006." ^

What is your point, exactly?

jules_siegel: GentDirkly:

That's right. It doesn't. Therefore it is not covered by the article on referendums and plebiscites. The exact term used in Article 2 of the decree is "encuesta de opinion publica." ^ Encuesta is a standard Spanish term for survey. It's not an official legal proposition with voting by ballot. Proposition 8 was a referendum. The polls about Proposition 8 were opinion surveys.

Zelaya "invoked article 5 of the Honduran "Civil Participation Act" of 2006. According to this act, all public functionaries can perform non-binding public consultations to inquire what the population thinks about policy measures. This act was approved by the National Congress and it was not contested by the Supreme Court of Justice, when it was published in the Official Paper of 2006." ^

What is your point, exactly?

The Congress and Supreme Court found this use of the 2006 act to be out-of-bounds. That is their prerogative. Maybe they were unfair to do so. France, for instance, has drafted at least one new Constitution (the current one) while an old constitution was still in effect. However, there is no rule saying all constitutional democratic republics have to be open to the re-writing of their constitutions. The US certainly isn't open to such an eventuality; imagine what would happen if Obama, who swore to uphold the Constitution, proposed writing a new one. He would be impeached for giving a false oath. Now there is no mechanism for instant removal of the President in this country the way there was in Honduras, but in any case, Zelaya was bound to respect precedent and the opinion of the other branches of government or face the consequences, just as Obama would be bound.

Let me take the opportunity on this holiday to remind you that the world is a crappy place. No government is ever formed without what some observers would call coercion or military/police action. Ours was formed in a vicious episode of guerrilla warfare between groups with a common language and ancestry. Our side was shooting to kill and theirs was trying to keep the peace. We may now have a beautiful system where all members of government were chosen from among the people, but this was not arrived at peacefully - nor could the original members of the First and Second Continental Congresses claim to have been freely and openly elected. Those bodies met in secret. I'm not saying I'm not proud of this country nor am I saying that I don't think guys like Sam Adams and Patrick Henry weren't patriots and heroes because they were, but we must look at the situation from all sides.

Stop asking what is my point, ok? My point is that calling the situation a coup and insisting that Zelaya be restored was and is premature. My point is that only Honduras can decide, and that all indications are they are still going to have an election in 4 months, and if the world would stop with all this rhetoric and removal of diplomats, maybe the people of Honduras would be more free to make the best possible choice. The appointed president wouldn't be standing again. If the people of Honduras don't like what went down, if they think it was a coup, they will surely elect different people into Congress.

If there is no election in November, or if international observers bring back a bad report about it, or if there is a lot of violence during the campaign, it is at that point and only at that point that it would be appropriate to start throwing the word 'coup' around, to start saying that Honduras has become something other than a constitutional, civilian-led republic. All that the world community has done in the last two weeks with all this rhetoric is make each of these possible outcomes more likely, putting the new leadership of Honduras into more and more of a defensive stance and inflaming the people.

That's my point.

GentDirkly:

The US certainly isn't open to such an eventuality; imagine what would happen if Obama, who swore to uphold the Constitution, proposed writing a new one. He would be impeached for giving a false oath.

It would depend on the circumstances. He certainly wouldn't be impeached for proposing to conduct an opinion poll about it.

My point is that calling the situation a coup and insisting that Zelaya be restored was and is premature.

A considerable portion of the people of Honduras disagree with you.

My point is that only Honduras can decide, and that all indications are they are still going to have an election in 4 months, and if the world would stop with all this rhetoric and removal of diplomats, maybe the people of Honduras would be more free to make the best possible choice. The appointed president wouldn't be standing again. If the people of Honduras don't like what went down, if they think it was a coup, they will surely elect different people into Congress.

The people of Honduras were not allowed to express their opinion about whether or not to have a constitutional convention. The Supreme Court made sure of that. Then without any constitutional authority or precedent, it ordered the elected president removed from office. So it's a bit naive to suppose that the individuals who now hold power will allow a fair election.

Honduras was a member of the OAS and bound by its agreements with the OAS. It violated those agreements by illegally removing the president. Now it has to face the consequences.

I'm going to add something. Honduras received many economic benefits as a result of its membership in the OAS. If you examine them, I think you'll find that they mainly accrued to the ruling class. This is a country where 11,000 people died in a hurricane, principally because the ruling class made absolutely no preparations to deal with it.

Now the very class that enriched itself by panhandling the world has decided to violate the agreements. As you say, that's their prerogative. But to argue that the OAS and the world community should ignore the violations and not pressure the Honduras ruling class in any way to respect them is really quite lame.