No Doublespeak excuses: To avoid looking the bully, support free Honduras!

…and condemn the bullies instead of joining them!

(In the category of why you can’t believe a lot of what you read in the papers anymore, or what you hear on TV network news, or radio…)

Actually heard on NPR, a commentator said he “sympathizes” with Obama for wanting to avoid the appearance of a bully in his condemnation of the “coup” (his word) in Honduras.

So what, does he think Latins are stupid!? What a racist, elitist, crass, heartless thing to say! Hondurans know full well who the bullies are, and the United States and Obama included will rue the day they joined the bullies against the people of Honduras!

Venezuelans and Ecuadorians and Bolivians are not stupid either! In Spanish-language forums across the Internet and worldwide, Hispanics and freedom-minded people from everywhere are congratulating the Honduran people for their stand for democracy, for freedom, against the creeping tyranny of international and national socialism!

It was on NPR’s “All Things Considered”, where no assault on logic is too absurd to hear as long as the politics are approved…

..The subject of Honduras came up and they repeated the usual backward inside-out upside-down Officially Approved Media Line about the “coup” in Honduras. Backwards because the coup plotters were Mel Zelaya and Hugo Chavez.

One of the members of this panel actually said he “sympathizes with Obama” in condemning the coup because he wants to avoid being seen as the “bully” in Latin America.

I got news. Latin Americans are not so stupid as to fall for such a flimsy excuse for supporting socialist dictators and their overthrow of republican democracies in the region!

And Hondurans are not so stupid, stupid, stupid. But maybe he’s just talking out the Pavlov school of indoctrination, where anything dictatorial left or socialist is good, and anything dictatoria right is bad.

So does Obama support elected presidents overthrowing democracy and bullying their entire populations or not?

Two callers, one of them from Honduras, made the case that of course, that since the removal of coup-plotter Mel Zelaya was legal and constitutional that it was not a coup.

Mel Zelaya had already executed his own coup. He was __1__already ruling by presidential decree, __2__stopped enforcing the law, __3__tried to crimp the independent authority for running elections by robbing its budget, __4__ignored the cease and desist order from the Supreme Court, calling them “pipsqueak” judges, __5__acted as if he had won a court challenge that he had lost, __6__led a violent mob to break into the storage facility where his illegal “ballots” (brought in from Venezuela) had been stored, __7__persisted in his constitutional convention, on and on.

So in ordering his arrest for treason, the Supreme Court recognized that the dictator Zelaya had already removed himself from being president of Honduras, according to Article 239 of its constitution.

They did not arrest a president on June 28, 2009, they arrested a common citizen who had “immediately ceased” being president as soon as he proposed placing –in his own publicly recorded words– the issue of re-election of president to change as part of his fraudulent supposed constitutional convention. The order of arrest was a factual recognition of this condition.

Some say then why wasn’t he taken before a court for a trial. The current president and the other civil authorities in Honduras agree, and insist that he turn himself into the proper policing authorities to answer for the long list of crimes against the people of Honduras.


Tags: , , ,

%d bloggers like this: