Honduras: How "Coups" Are Manufactured by the Press
mimus
ago for violating Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution, which reads
"No citizen who 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."
So using Google News and the search-phrase "Honduras coup" gives you
12,661 hits.
Using Google News and the search-phrase "Honduras 'Article 239' " gives
you 8 (eight) unique hits.
And two of those are "liberal" explanations-- from "Daily Kos" and
"CounterPunch"-- that Zelaya wasn't _really_ violating Article 239.
--
It is usual on these occasions to make a great vapouring
about honour and conscience: but as those words are now
generally acknowledged to be utterly destitute of meaning,
I have too much respect for your understanding to say any
thing about them.
< Peacock
Don H
news:n_OdndBTep8n5NDX...@giganews.com...
# Article 239 is odd in the extreme - by whom, and when, was such article
inserted, and why is it there? ("..or proposes its reform" -?)
Any Constitution should be capable of amendment, provided a plebiscite
is conducted, ie. alteration by Referendum, in open debate about pros and
cons.
However, any nation is entitled to go to hell in its own way, and while
seizure of power can be reprehensible, suppression of dissent or change can
be equally dictatorial.
You either provide an outlet for discontent, or it may end up exploding
in your face.
And if elections are only valid if a puppet President or Vice-President
is elected, then Democracy becomes seen for the sham it is.
The Law is one thing, Justice is another.
mimus
> "mimus" <tinmi...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:n_OdndBTep8n5NDX...@giganews.com...
>
>> Ex-President Zelaya of Honduras was removed from office a couple of days
>> ago for violating Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution, which reads
>> "No citizen who 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."
>>
>> So using Google News and the search-phrase "Honduras coup" gives you
>> 12,661 hits.
>>
>> Using Google News and the search-phrase "Honduras 'Article 239' " gives
>> you 8 (eight) unique hits.
>>
>> And two of those are "liberal" explanations-- from "Daily Kos" and
>> "CounterPunch"-- that Zelaya wasn't _really_ violating Article 239.
>
> # Article 239 is odd in the extreme - by whom, and when, was such article
> inserted, and why is it there? ("..or proposes its reform" -?)
Well, the writers had an eye toward _continuismo_ (life-long holding of
the Executive) as being a hallmark of (Latin American) dictatorship, so
they wanted to knock _that_ in the head for all time: I like its
carefulness not to specify holding of the Presidency alone as disabling
further holding of the Presidency-- eg, being, say, "Supremo" or
"Generalissimo" for even a day will disable you, too-- and its extension
to even _proposing_, even _indirectly_, any change in it . . . .
Notice that _continuismo_ is a hallmark of _Chavismo_, the _Chavista_
executives of the ALBA countries always moving to ensure that they can be
"elected" again and again (with distinctly grotty goings-on during the
elections), if not already allowed . . . .
So I'd say Article 239 has earned its keep, even though-- surprise!-- it
got first invoked against a "left-wing" rather than a "right-wing"
aspirant to _continuismo_.
--
Find out just what any people will quietly submit to
and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong
which will be imposed upon them.
< Frederick Douglass