PimFortuynsGhost on November 30, 2009 at 8:54 AM

The authors of the articles I linked to. >>

Why Zelaya’s Actions Were Legal
Alberto Valiente Thoresen was born in San Salvador, El Salvador. He currently resides in Norway where he serves on the board of the Norwegian Solidarity Committee with Latin America.

Hypocrisy and the Honduran Coup
Saul Landau is an Institute for Policy Studies fellow
Nelson Valdés is Emeritus Professor, Sociology, University of New Mexico.

The Coup and the U.S. Airbase in Honduras
Nikolas Kozloff

Chiquita in Latin America
Nikolas Kozloff

Should I dismiss these stories because they were published at CP within the last week? >>
Obama as the Manchurian Candidate
Blame Larry Summers
Obama as LBJ
Get Ready for the Obama / GOP Alliance
(Obama)Weak-Kneed in China
The Placeholder Presidency of Obama

Please provide the links for your accusations about which Cockburn you are referring to, Patrick or Alexander.

Should Rush fans dismiss him because he is/was(?) a narcotics abuser?

President Zelaya intended to perform a non-binding public consultation, about the conformation of an elected National Constituent Assembly. To do this, he invoked article 5 of the Honduran “Civil Participation Act” of 2006. According to this act, all public functionaries can perform non-binding public consultations to inquire what the population thinks about policy measures. This act was approved by the National Congress and it was not contested by the Supreme Court of Justice, when it was published in the Official Paper of 2006. That is, until the president of the republic employed it in a manner that was not amicable to the interests of the members of these institutions.

A few more articles that explain why that gorilla is minus the debate.

Bill Blizzard on November 29, 2009 at 9:56 PM

//

So we are to believe that some obscure law trumps the Honduran Constitution?

Oh wait, ObamaReidPelosiCare trumps the US Constitution.

Nevermind.

Bill Blizzard on November 29, 2009 at 9:56 PM

Counterpunch, again?

Seriously, you are one f#cked up human being. So tell me, what part of Cockburn’s schtick is so appealing to filth like you? Is it his support of pedophilia? Maybe it is his Holocaust denial? Or maybe, it was his claiming that Pol Pot and the Killing Fields of Cambodia were a myth?

I’m curious, because no one with a soul reads that sh!t with a straight face.

I’m having a hard time deciding whether this article in the New York Times is dishonest or just biased toward the Obama Administration’s point of view.

Um, Yes.

Just like the AGW crowd, they are both biased and dishonest. I just hope this is the high water mark for the Left.

It’s tradition to say “I wonder why” at this point, but I really don’t.

Except you and I both know that’s now what really happened.

I think Jimmie means “not what happened”.

Only not nearly as persuasive or convincing.

DUMMIES!

The paper written by the Law Library of Congress was shown to be a piece of crap.

dave742 on November 29, 2009 at 3:33 PM

The paper that you cite was written by José María Rodríguez González, who goes by several titles: “US Foreign Policy Researcher” “Political analyst, devoted to U.S. foreign policy”, and “U.S. Foreign Policy International Analyst”. Depends on who’s hiring him, I suppose.

His papers show quite a visceral hatred for President Uribe of Columbia. Rather a soul-mate of Hugo Chavez in that respect, isn’t he? Small wonder, then, that he wrote a paper contrived against the US Library of Congress. Of course he will align himself with the prevailing thugocracy.

I am unimpressed, Mr. Dave742.

President Zelaya intended to perform a non-binding public consultation, about the conformation of an elected National Constituent Assembly. To do this, he invoked article 5 of the Honduran “Civil Participation Act” of 2006. According to this act, all public functionaries can perform non-binding public consultations to inquire what the population thinks about policy measures. This act was approved by the National Congress and it was not contested by the Supreme Court of Justice, when it was published in the Official Paper of 2006. That is, until the president of the republic employed it in a manner that was not amicable to the interests of the members of these institutions.

A few more articles that explain why that gorilla is minus the debate.

Horatius on November 29, 2009 at 4:15 PM

Awesome post.

Industrial strength and weapons grade.

I’m having a hard time deciding whether this article in the New York Times is dishonest or just biased toward the Obama Administration’s point of view.

What do you mean, “or“?

We understand that we have to build consensus and that we have to work multilaterally, but we can’t sacrifice a country to do that,” said a senior administration official, who like others interviewed for this article asked not to be identified because he or she were discussing diplomatic deliberations. “Not recognizing the elections unless President Zelaya is restored to power doesn’t get us anywhere.”

When Zelaya was first booted from office this administration went bonkers in support of the wannabe dictator, this article and quote shows our administration wants to switch sides and this writer is just doing her duty by enabling the wannabe constitutional monarch in chief.

Looks like Zelaya, Chavez, Castro, and Obama have failed to topple Honduran democracy.

elduende on November 29, 2009 at 4:14 PM

This is one time I’m happy to see a foreign policy failure.

Though in the larger sense, the policy was a failure the moment Obama took Zelaya’s side

Just more of the same from the NYT’s, which is why I canceled my subscription over a year ago. Despite my cancelation, the rag dutifully lands upon my doorstep every morning anyways.

Exit question: Is the continued delivery after cancellation a vehicle the NYT’s uses to inflate/disguise their plummeting circulation?

Archimedes

Don’t know about that, but I think you consider it assault.

He was a druggie that got into Harvard via Affirmative Action.

The content of this whole article is way over his head.