Honduras congress votes to allow referendums on term limits, re-election

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press

Honduras congress votes to allow referendums on term limits, re-election
FREDDY CUEVAS
Associated Press
10:20 p.m. EST, January 13, 2011

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras (AP) — Honduras' congress has approved a measure that may allow referendums on once-taboo subjects like re-election and term limits, the hot-button issues behind the coup that ousted President Manuel Zelaya in 2009.

There is a measure of irony in the changes approved Wednesday night: Congress justified the removal of the leftist Zelaya in large part on his attempt to hold a referendum that might allow presidential re-election. The interim leaders held firm despite international sanctions and aid cutoffs.

But with new President Porfirio Lobo in place, Honduran officials seem less vehement about the issue. Lobo, like Zelaya, has denied wanting to change the law so he could seek re-election.

The current constitution flatly says there can be no amendment "in any way" on the prohibition against presidential re-election. It says trying that can be grounds for loss of citizenship.

Read more: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-lt-honduras-referendum,0,2381696.story

[Poll_Blind]

1. What a strange turn, really, given recent history. (?)

PB

[Arctic Dave]

2. WTF! To say there are some people who deserve an apology is an

gross understatement.

[rpannier]

3. I'm sure they have no other choice

The only way they can keep a power hungry person from becoming a virtual dictator is by recinding this law so they can keep control of power to protect the country from this happening.

Do I have my Orwell-speak down?

[Judi Lynn]

4. The Known Unknowns in Honduras

January 14, 2011
The Known Unknowns in Honduras
Leaked cables reveal U.S. government knowledge of disastrous military coup
By Jeremy Kryt

When is a coup not a coup? Taken altogether, the secret diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks have exposed multiple instances of deception by the U.S. State Department, in relation to foreign dignitaries, friendly nations and even U.N. Representatives. But recently leaked cables sent from the U.S. Embassy in Tegucigalpa, the Honduran capital, offer evidence that the State Department was, in at least one instance, also misleading the American people.

In June 2009, Manuel Zelaya, the democratically-elected president of Honduras, was ousted from power by a coalition of military leaders and far-right political elites, plunging the country into an economic and human rights nightmare from which it has yet to emerge. A a throwback to “the way Honduran presidents were removed in the past: a bogus resignation letter and a one-way ticket to a neighboring country.” Honduran soldiers had kidnapped Zelaya in his pajamas and a “totally illegitimate” puppet government was installed.

This in turn led to mass protests across the country, followed by harsh crackdowns under martial law. According to human rights groups, scores of peaceful demonstrators, union leaders, journalists and teachers have been slain by government forces since the coup, and hundreds of others have been beaten and detained when police and soldiers attacked peaceful marches and demonstrations. (Ten journalists were murdered in 2010, making it the most dangerous country in the world for members of the press on a per capita basis.)

But the State Department chose not to tell the American people about atrocities. Instead the coup was portrayed as a murky legal situation and the Obama administration made little mention of the civil rights atrocities. Most important of all, say critics, the State Department never designated the takeover a “military coup,” which under U.S. law would have necessitated the cessation of all aid programs.

More:
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/6842/the_known_unknowns_in_honduras/

[Wilms]

5. Heh-heh

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Judi Lynn]

7. Sad, isn't it, that this information has always been available,

yet those in this country who screeched the loudest in favor of the coup couldn't have been less concerned with the facts?

The fact they were building their case on pure rot didn't slow them down whatsoever, as long as they thought they could shout everyone else down.

Corporate propagandists realize they push any old crap off on the country since a lot of people are too lazy or indifferent to learn the difference, anyway, but DO have all the time in the world to howl and rage against leftists, regardless of the truth of the matter.

It IS hilarious that the truth will eventually become common knowledge, and the only thing different will be the fact that the people who shrieked their lungs out over the Honduran oligarchy's and military's "right" to overthrow the people's elected President will simply change the subject if you ever bring it up to them. That's the pattern.

As for the "re-election" part, it's absolutely TRUE, he never brought up the subject. That was pure invention on the part of the propagandists. Had the referendum gone foreward, the results would STILL have had no effect upon him and his Presidency whatsoever, as his own term was due to expire in November, just a few months after the coup, well before there would have ever been any formal discussion in the national assembly concerning any changes to their constitution.

http://karmalised.com.nyud.net:8090/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/lanny-davis_office.jpg http://farm3.static.flickr.com.nyud.net:8090/2652/3739790070_a3b4f81a77.jpg

"United Students Against Sweatshops hung this banner today (20 July) on the
building across the street from coup regime lobbyist Lanny Davis’ office in Washington."
Great reading your new posts, pax-hombre. Welcome to D.U. :hi:

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Peace Patriot]

9. The Associated Pukes strike again! There was NOTHING in Zelaya's referendum about "term limits"!

NOTHING!

---

"There is a measure of irony in the changes approved Wednesday night: Congress justified the removal of the leftist Zelaya in large part on his attempt to hold a referendum that might allow presidential re-election. The interim leaders held firm despite international sanctions and aid cutoffs."--Associated Pukes

---

Here is this lie AGAIN! Nothing--not one word!--in the referendum that Zelaya proposed referred in any way to "term limits." What he proposed was a simple question: Do you want to vote on forming a Constituent Assembly to re-write the Constitution? Yes or No.

Not even, "Do you want to do it?" just "Do you want to vote on whether to do it or not?" And it was not even a binding vote--merely an advisory vote to the legislature. Why did he propose this? Because the trade unions and other civic groups had demanded it! Honduras' constitution was written by Reagan's henchmen in the 1980s "of, by and for" the rich oligarchs and the military. They thought they should have a constitution written "of, by and for the people." Zelaya agreed. Re-writes of the constitution are a common practice in Latin America. He proposed it. He fired the military general who refused an order of the president to deploy the ballots. (Guess who controls the voting process in Honduras under the Reagan era constitution?) They shot up his house, dragged him out of bed at gunpoint, put him on a plane, which stopped at the U.S. air base in Honduras for refueling, and threw him out of the country--which IS against a specific provision of the constitution--then proceeded to beat up, imprison, torture, rape and kill civic leaders who disagreed--who led peaceful protests.

That Zelaya's proposal had anything to do with term limits is A TOTAL LIE. There is not even a particle of truth in it. To repeat it, as if it had even a shred of credibility--is to compound the lie, repeat the lie, promote the lie.

Damn this makes me mad!

-----

And I suspect that the following is yet another lie--this one without any defense (such as they were just quoting the coupsters about what Zelaya had tried to do). This one is very likely an inexcusable, bald-faced, brazen, outright lie (and notice the lack of quotation marks in the first sentence)...

--

"The exiled Zelaya urged Hondurans to keep pushing for the country to hold a referendum on whether to allow presidential re-election.

'What two years ago was considered a crime, today is constitutional,' Zelaya said in a message broadcast by Radio Globo."--Associated Pukes

--

Here's what I think they did: What Zelaya ACTUALLY said is in quotes, in the second line. What the Associated Pukes INVENT him saying is carefully NOT put in quotes, in the first line, so they can't be caught out telling the bald-faced lie--that he urged a referendum on term limits. He never did before--never even breathed such an intention. He wanted "people power." He wanted public committees formed to discuss all aspects of the constitution, to argue everything out, to come to consensus on each provision--like the trade unions, human rights groups and others wanted. That's ALL that he proposed, in a non-binding referendum. So WHY would he amend his views NOW--on the very matter on which they lied about him before, ousted him from his rightful, elected position, threw him out of the country--in egregious violation of the law--and started killing his supporters?

I'm fairly sure that "the exiled Zelaya" WOULD NEVER urge Hondurans to keep pushing for the country "to hold a referendum on whether to allow presidential re-election." What he more than likely said was that Hondurans should keep pushing the country for constitutional REFORM! That's what he says, in essence, in the quoted part. He mentions "what two years ago was considered a crime...". Well, "what two years ago was considered a crime" was MERELY voting on the general question of holding a constituent assembly, NOT proposing a vote on term limits, which he DIDN'T DO. They have put words in his mouth. And if what he actually said was, they should back this Lobo referendum on term limits, the next part of his sentence was more than likely "in order to further constitutional and social reform." They likely truncated his statement--but since they don't put quotation marks around it, we don't know.

I think we are looking at foul play--journalistic foul play. It doesn't surprise me. I've seen it many times before. That's why I call them the Associated Pukes. But it does continue to appall me.

[Judi Lynn]

10. The lie worked. It stuck in the minds of those who refused to look beyond the headlines,

or do any reading at all.

They all rushed here to vent what they heard on Fox. Worked like a charm.

Thanks for telling the truth, Peace Patriot. We know by now we will never get it from our corporate media.

[Judi Lynn]

11. Honduran Constitution: Still Explosive, But No Longer Set in Stone

Honduran Constitution: Still Explosive, But No Longer Set in Stone
Written by Rodolfo Pastor Fasquelle
Friday, 21 January 2011 14:44

The Honduran Congress's decision last week to allow popular referendums to amend the Constitution is nothing short of momentous given the country's tumultous historical span of the last two years. The new measures need to be approved a second time when Congress begins a new session on Tuesday.

The significance, if not the irony, lies in the fact that many of these representatives who support these constitutional reforms opposed them when they were put forward by former President Manuel Zelaya. In total, 103 of 128 members of Congress voted to reform Article 5 of the constitution. Furthermore, they used Zelaya's initiative for constitutional reform to justify the illegal military coup on June 28, 2008 which deposed the former president. So today’s reformers have in theory legalized consulting the sovereign citizenry on whatever it deems appropriate. At the same time they have in hindsight legitimized Pres. Zelaya’s argument that changes to unchangeable laws were needed. The difference, says the President of Congress Hernandez, is that this reform was “done legally”, after extensive consultation, whereas Zelaya’s presumably was not.

It does not matter if this claim is true. The vote was not completely unexpected and not altogether contradictory, since prior to the coup Lobo—who in June 2009 was president of the Nationalist Party—had repeatedly declared that he personally was in favor of a “constitutional consultation” on a constituent assembly. Lobo’s decision to lead his Party into the coup was widely perceived to be an act of desperate opportunism. At the time he was also the designated National Party presidential candidate for the November 2009 elections, and was seriously lagging behind Liberal Party candidate Elvin Santos. No strategy had seemed to work in his favor despite divisions amongst liberals, and he was expected to lose the national elections for a second time in a row (Zelaya had defeated him in 2005). The coup would, and in fact did, divide the Liberal Party irremediably and guaranteed Lobo a triumph.

But his triumph would prove to be bittersweet. Due mostly to the stance of South American countries, the OAS—which expelled Honduras under the coup regime—refuses to readmit the country until Lobo remedies some of the outstanding injustices the coup had generated, such as widespread acts of violence and repression against the Resistance movement and the forced exile of the deposed president and many of his more loyal collaborators. In the meantime, Honduras has become virtually ungovernable; its two principal cities have been listed amongst the ten most violent in the world, just after Kandahar. The country has also lost international credit, and the economy might have collapsed if not for U.S. foreign assistance propping it up, along with a boom in coffee prices. On the other hand, the President of Congress J. Orlando Hernandez has sustained that rather than being “the same thing Zelaya was calling for,” as most observers have argued, last week’s reform of Article 5 of the Constitution is a completely different beast. He argues, albeit unconvincingly, that in fact, it makes the Constituent Assembly to rewrite the constitution superfluous since any aspect of the constitution can now be amended through a referendum authorized by Congress. We must consider the intent behind and benefits derived from this surprising development as well as the factors that will influence its outcome.

More:
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/honduras-archives-46/2874-honduras-constitution-still-explosive-but-no-longer-set-in-stone