[Peace-discuss] State Department Terminates Aid to Honduras Coup
Regime
C. G. Estabrook
galliher at illinois.edu
Fri Sep 4 11:02:03 CDT 2009
Are you suggesting an LA version of the "we-can't-just-cut-and-run" argument?
You don't support that in the Middle East, do you? --CGE
Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> Yes indeed.
>
> Is it "non-intervention" to let our dogs off the leash?
>
> Ricky
>
> "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
>
> --- On *Fri, 9/4/09, C. G. Estabrook /<galliher at illinois.edu>/* wrote:
>
>
> From: C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] State Department Terminates Aid to
> Honduras Coup Regime
> To: "E. Wayne Johnson" <ewj at pigs.ag>
> Cc: "Peace-discuss List" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> Date: Friday, September 4, 2009, 10:35 AM
>
> E. Wayne Johnson wrote:
> > Isn't the most appropriate response of the US a cessation of military
> > activity in the region and a non-interventionist foreign policy?
>
> Yes, indeed. Plus immediate withdrawal of all US military and CIA,
> and a cessation of SOA training and all "aid," military and
> non-military. Substantial US economic and development aid should be
> channeled through the UN so that the US cannot use it for praise or
> blame.
>
> Since Honduras was the pretty thoroughly colonized hub of the US
> contra war, it's been deeply impacted by the USG, which was
> undoubtedly aware of the upcoming coup.
>
>
> E. Wayne Johnson wrote:
> > Whether or not Honduras has an impeachment provision seems to be
> a matter of semiotics. It appears that the Congress decided to
> remove Zelaya and the Supreme Court ordered him removed, the
> "equivalent" to impeachment and removal.
> >
> >> Congress voted to remove him for what it called "repeated
> violations of the
> >> constitution and the law", and the Supreme Court said it had
> ordered the president to be removed from office to protect law and
> order.
> > Here's the link to the BBC page:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8124154.stm
> >
> >
> > Honduras apparently has a provision for action under duress, so
> the coup is not exactly "illegal".
> >> Article 24 of Honduras' penal code will exonerate the joint
> chiefs of staff
> >> who made the decision, because it allows for making tough
> decisions based on the good of the state, Inestroza said.
> > But, My Original question was "Why are we meddling with the
> affairs of Honduras, a sovereign state?"
> >
> > Should China impose monetary policy sanctions on the US because
> Mr. Obama has
> > proposed illegal detention of dissidents, or because Obama has
> continued Bush's unconstitutional activities, or because the US is
> in the process of escalating its occupation of Afghanistan? Jimmy
> Carter told us that the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan was so
> immoral that Amerikans ought to starve the Soviets into submission.
> Carter instituted a grain embargo that devastated the American
> Farmer. How can we be on the moral high ground in Afghanistan while
> the Soviets were scoundrels for doing nothing worse than what we are
> doing?
> >
> > Isn't the most appropriate response of the US a cessation of
> military activity in the region and a non-interventionist foreign
> policy?
> >
> >
> >
> > On 9/4/2009 8:22 AM, Robert Naiman wrote:
> >> The Honduran Congress never "impeached" President Zelaya. There
> is no impeachment provision in the Honduran Constitution.
> >>
> >> The top legal adviser to the Honduran military admitted that the
> Honduran military broke the law:
> >>
> >> http://www.miamiherald.com/1506/story/1125872.html
> >>
> >> Do you have a link to that BBC story?
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 8:49 AM, E. Wayne Johnson<ewj at pigs.ag
> <http://us.mc306.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=ewj@pigs.ag>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The BBC reports:
> >>>
> >>> Tension had been brewing in Honduras over recent months. Mr
> Zelaya sacked
> >>> the head of the armed forces, who refused to give logistical
> support for
> >>> the 28 June vote. The Supreme Court overruled him, saying the
> army chief
> >>> should be reinstated.
> >>>
> >>> When Mr Zelaya insisted the consultation would go ahead,
> >>>
> >>> Since Honduras's own Congress has IMPEACHED and voted to Remove
> Zelaya, and the Honduras's own Supreme Court has ordered Zelaya's
> removal, How is
> >>> it that Anyone could say that his removal is Illegal, since it
> would appear that Due Process and the Rule of Law is being followed?
> >>>
> >>> On 9/4/2009 7:36 AM, E. Wayne Johnson wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Of course I am pleased that the US is terminating its "aid" to
> Honduras.
> >>> Honduras should be glad too. Amerika's jelly beans have
> fishhooks in them.
> >>>
> >>> What business does the United States have interfering with the
> conduct of
> >>> government in Honduras, a sovereign state?
> >>>
> >>> The American battle for independence from the bloody British
> was an illegal coup. We have a military base in Honduras. Why
> shouldn't they throw us out of there if they could?
> >>>
> >>> How is our meddling with Honduras not an act of aggression
> against a weak
> >>> sovereign nation? How is it any different from what we are
> doing in Iraq
> >>> and Afghanistan?
> >>>
> >>> It appears that the initiating spark in Honduras is an
> insistance on violation of term limits by the now-ousted President.
> What is it that we like about that?
> >>>
> >>> Is the US on the wrong side of the fight? (once again?)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> <http://us.mc306.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net>
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list