Comments on: Obama Continues His Love Affair with Dictators and Strong Men http://moderncounterculture.com/political-commentary/obama-continues-his-love-affair-with-dictators-and-strong-men/ Nonpartisan, conservative opinion, news, forums and satire. Tue, 23 Mar 2010 03:01:19 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Duncan McFarlane http://moderncounterculture.com/political-commentary/obama-continues-his-love-affair-with-dictators-and-strong-men/comment-page-1/#comment-1420 Duncan McFarlane Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:23:10 +0000 http://moderncounterculture.com/?p=613#comment-1420 p.s I'm sure Zelaya isnt perfect - however it's ridiculous to argue that this somehow justifies a military coup and shooting his supporters dead in the street. If you've evidence from an independent source (i.e not the Honduran coup government of Michelletti, or the military or the Honduran media they now control) of any killings of unarmed people or torture by Zelaya's supporters by all means provide it. p.s I’m sure Zelaya isnt perfect – however it’s ridiculous to argue that this somehow justifies a military coup and shooting his supporters dead in the street. If you’ve evidence from an independent source (i.e not the Honduran coup government of Michelletti, or the military or the Honduran media they now control) of any killings of unarmed people or torture by Zelaya’s supporters by all means provide it.

]]> By: Duncan McFarlane http://moderncounterculture.com/political-commentary/obama-continues-his-love-affair-with-dictators-and-strong-men/comment-page-1/#comment-1419 Duncan McFarlane Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:18:49 +0000 http://moderncounterculture.com/?p=613#comment-1419 Yes., i see "admin". Micheletti suspended the rights to free speech, not to be jailed without trial and most other constitutional rights and the army shoot unarmed demonstrators dead and torture others to death in order to "protect the constitution". Pinochet claimed he was defending democracy and "the constitutional order" too. He wasn't either. Yes., i see “admin”. Micheletti suspended the rights to free speech, not to be jailed without trial and most other constitutional rights and the army shoot unarmed demonstrators dead and torture others to death in order to “protect the constitution”. Pinochet claimed he was defending democracy and “the constitutional order” too. He wasn’t either.

]]> By: admin http://moderncounterculture.com/political-commentary/obama-continues-his-love-affair-with-dictators-and-strong-men/comment-page-1/#comment-588 admin Thu, 09 Jul 2009 05:22:56 +0000 http://moderncounterculture.com/?p=613#comment-588 The military's intervention alone does not make this a "military coup" in the traditional sense. Unlike previous incidents in which the military was the primary instigator, the military acted largely on behalf of elected and appointed officials. In no means would I call this a democratic revolution, but then Honduras isn't a democracy at all, is it? Honduras is a Democratic Republic. The Republican structure of government is designed to limit the power of any one branch. Honduras's constitution has clauses that are completely unalterable. Zelaya tried to set in motion something that would undo this. According to all sane estimations, his actions were illegal. While the Constitution provides no method of removing the President, it certainly doesn't prohibit it. The military acted as a tool of the state and, because of that, I consider the entire incident a legitimate defense of the Constitution and not a military coup (in which the state become subordinate to the military). You seem to know more about Honduran history than I do, but I'd hardly agree that a clause to limit how many times a president can be elected sounds like it was inserted to further the interests of a ruling oligarchy. As for Negroponte and the death squads, I'll have to read more, but there's usually more to the story than sweet, innocent bystanders on one side and death squads on the other. The military’s intervention alone does not make this a “military coup” in the traditional sense. Unlike previous incidents in which the military was the primary instigator, the military acted largely on behalf of elected and appointed officials. In no means would I call this a democratic revolution, but then Honduras isn’t a democracy at all, is it? Honduras is a Democratic Republic. The Republican structure of government is designed to limit the power of any one branch. Honduras’s constitution has clauses that are completely unalterable. Zelaya tried to set in motion something that would undo this. According to all sane estimations, his actions were illegal. While the Constitution provides no method of removing the President, it certainly doesn’t prohibit it. The military acted as a tool of the state and, because of that, I consider the entire incident a legitimate defense of the Constitution and not a military coup (in which the state become subordinate to the military).

You seem to know more about Honduran history than I do, but I’d hardly agree that a clause to limit how many times a president can be elected sounds like it was inserted to further the interests of a ruling oligarchy. As for Negroponte and the death squads, I’ll have to read more, but there’s usually more to the story than sweet, innocent bystanders on one side and death squads on the other.

]]> By: Duncan McFarlane http://moderncounterculture.com/political-commentary/obama-continues-his-love-affair-with-dictators-and-strong-men/comment-page-1/#comment-552 Duncan McFarlane Mon, 06 Jul 2009 15:42:38 +0000 http://moderncounterculture.com/?p=613#comment-552 It's naive to confuse a military coup with a democratic revolution. The wealthy and the military in Honduras have been running death squads in Honduras for decades. When the 1982 constitution was written it was written by a government that got elected using military death squads like Battalion 316 to kill its opponents and terrify opposition voters so they didnt vote or voted for the party the Reagan administration favoured. John Negroponte, then US ambassador was overseeing all this - and the training of the contras to torture and murder unarmed men, women and children in Nicaragua. The military death squads have never entirely gone away - they shot two unarmed pro-Zelaya demonstrators today and have beaten and jailed hundreds in supposedly 'protecting democracy'. The poor majority in Honduras still support Zelaya, the elected President, who only tried to hold a referendum on changing the constitution to allow him to stand for a second term as President. http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/19/world/in-human-rights-court-honduras-is-first-to-face-death-squad-trial.html?scp=1&sq=In%20Human%20Rights%20Court,%20Honduras%20Is%20First%20to%20Face%20Death%20Squad%20Trial%20&st=cse http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article410491.ece http://report2009.amnesty.org/en/regions/americas/honduras http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/06/honduras-blocks-president-return The only thing Obama has done wrong is not to condemn the coup more strongly. As for not condemning the Iranian government right away anyone who has read even a single book on Iranian history would know that the backing of a US President would be the kiss of death for Iranian opposition groups - it'd be like a US Presidential candidate getting endorsed by the Taliban. Obama did the right thing on Iran by being careful what he said. Saying more would have harmed the chances for democracy in Iran, because believe it or not the US government - which backed the Shah's dictatorship and armed Saddam while he invaded Iran and gassed Iranians - is not popular in Iran. It’s naive to confuse a military coup with a democratic revolution. The wealthy and the military in Honduras have been running death squads in Honduras for decades. When the 1982 constitution was written it was written by a government that got elected using military death squads like Battalion 316 to kill its opponents and terrify opposition voters so they didnt vote or voted for the party the Reagan administration favoured.
John Negroponte, then US ambassador was overseeing all this – and the training of the contras to torture and murder unarmed men, women and children in Nicaragua. The military death squads have never entirely gone away – they shot two unarmed pro-Zelaya demonstrators today and have beaten and jailed hundreds in supposedly ‘protecting democracy’. The poor majority in Honduras still support Zelaya, the elected President, who only tried to hold a referendum on changing the constitution to allow him to stand for a second term as President.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/19/world/in-human-rights-court-honduras-is-first-to-face-death-squad-trial.html?scp=1&sq=In%20Human%20Rights%20Court,%20Honduras%20Is%20First%20to%20Face%20Death%20Squad%20Trial%20&st=cse

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article410491.ece

http://report2009.amnesty.org/en/regions/americas/honduras

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/06/honduras-blocks-president-return

The only thing Obama has done wrong is not to condemn the coup more strongly. As for not condemning the Iranian government right away anyone who has read even a single book on Iranian history would know that the backing of a US President would be the kiss of death for Iranian opposition groups – it’d be like a US Presidential candidate getting endorsed by the Taliban. Obama did the right thing on Iran by being careful what he said. Saying more would have harmed the chances for democracy in Iran, because believe it or not the US government – which backed the Shah’s dictatorship and armed Saddam while he invaded Iran and gassed Iranians – is not popular in Iran.

]]> By: admin http://moderncounterculture.com/political-commentary/obama-continues-his-love-affair-with-dictators-and-strong-men/comment-page-1/#comment-475 admin Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:03:36 +0000 http://moderncounterculture.com/?p=613#comment-475 Sadly I don't find it odd at all. I generally try to avoid conspiracy theories, but I wonder whether he might see some parallels between what happened in Honduras and what the reaction might be to his own progressive agenda if he pushes too hard. The results of the Iranian election were condemned largely because Obama & Co. doesn't agree with the ideology of the Iranian leaders (not that I'm trying to defend the results of that election). Obama went after Honduras so quickly because he agrees with President Zelaya's goals and I'd be surprised if he didn't truly consider Zelaya's tactics necessary and proper to obtain the "right" social "change." Sadly I don’t find it odd at all. I generally try to avoid conspiracy theories, but I wonder whether he might see some parallels between what happened in Honduras and what the reaction might be to his own progressive agenda if he pushes too hard. The results of the Iranian election were condemned largely because Obama & Co. doesn’t agree with the ideology of the Iranian leaders (not that I’m trying to defend the results of that election). Obama went after Honduras so quickly because he agrees with President Zelaya’s goals and I’d be surprised if he didn’t truly consider Zelaya’s tactics necessary and proper to obtain the “right” social “change.”

]]> By: Obama Continues His Love Affair with Dictators and Strong Men … | Honduras today http://moderncounterculture.com/political-commentary/obama-continues-his-love-affair-with-dictators-and-strong-men/comment-page-1/#comment-464 Obama Continues His Love Affair with Dictators and Strong Men … | Honduras today Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:52:37 +0000 http://moderncounterculture.com/?p=613#comment-464 [...] here: Obama Continues His Love Affair with Dictators and Strong Men … Tags: duck-ringtone, gets-the-boot, Headline, honduras headline, white-house- Headline, [...] [...] here: Obama Continues His Love Affair with Dictators and Strong Men … Tags: duck-ringtone, gets-the-boot, Headline, honduras headline, white-house- Headline, [...]

]]> By: flinnie http://moderncounterculture.com/political-commentary/obama-continues-his-love-affair-with-dictators-and-strong-men/comment-page-1/#comment-461 flinnie Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:16:41 +0000 http://moderncounterculture.com/?p=613#comment-461 Is it me, or do you find it odd how quickly Obama has come out condemning Honduras for doing this, yet it took him over a week to come out to Iran? Even when he did it was a pretty weak statement. Its a good thing that Obama wasn't president back in the early 80's when Walesa was starting his Solidarity movement in Poland. Obama would have condemned him as well! Is it me, or do you find it odd how quickly Obama has come out condemning Honduras for doing this, yet it took him over a week to come out to Iran? Even when he did it was a pretty weak statement. Its a good thing that Obama wasn’t president back in the early 80’s when Walesa was starting his Solidarity movement in Poland. Obama would have condemned him as well!

]]>