What's the big surprise? We saw this coming for months. If you listen to the State Dept. (dept. of Imperial Affairs) the coup government was justified and is legitimate. The democratically elected President, is illegitimate. The Doublespeak is thick as pea soup.

"Democracy" is just one of those buzz words that is empty of meaning and is applied when convenient and serves for good PR. It has nothing to do with transparency, accountability, or government by and for the people.

FICTION ARTICLE ---- EIGHT (8) BIG LIES

Surely what is going on in Honduras is a CIA coup d’etat dictatorship, well planned out in advance, and executed to perfection. Comes now this article riddled with fiction to try and fool us into believing it was all a spur of the moment thing being controlled by the whim and caprice of politics.

LIE 1
“visit to Honduras by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in late October”

LIGHT: Not only did Ms. Clinton not go to Honduras, but when Zelaya went to Washington Ms. Clinton at first refused to see him. And not until he pleaded for a meeting in the office of a lower level employee of the State Department was he given an audience.

LIE 2
“there had been some promising signs that Obama was going to remain true to his pledge”

LIGHT: From the start Obama and Clinton refused to recognize it as a “military” coup d’etat making it impossible to stop all the military and economical aid flowing from U.S. to Honduras.

LIE 3
“Obama spoke out in strong terms against Zelaya's overthrow”

LIGHT: Fiction, for Obama refused to even meet with Zelaya and continued training Honduran generals in the U.S. School Of The Americas.

LIE 4
“The U.S. backed a Costa Rican-brokered compromise that would have seen Zelaya returned to office”

Light: No, for it was impossible for the compromise to work as the next day a U.S. Ambassador declared that the election would be recognized even if Zelaya was kept a prisoner under armed guard.

LIE 5
“All non-humanitarian U.S. aid was suspended to the de facto regime.”

LIGHT: Millions and millions of military and economical aid is still flowing into Honduras from the U.S.

LIE 6
“This firm U.S. reaction apparently "privately stunned" the coup leaders”

LIGHT: Clearly no surprises in this CIA coup dictatorship, not even for those they tried to fool, as so self-evident was the fraud.

LIE 7
“Obama administration succumbed to this pro-coup Republican pressure”

LIGHT: The rich nobility of Honduras requested the CIA coup, the Republicans passed on the request to the CIA, and then the CIA told Obama what to say and how to act.

LIE 8
“The only two presidential candidates on the ballot supported the coup that ousted the elected president.”

LIGHT: From day one of the coup the two main conservative candidates claimed complete innocence and no involvement in the coup. One was Zelaya’s Vise President, and he resigned immediately after the coup.

Obama's strategy in Honduras is easy to understand once his formal condemnation is understood as mask for the actual power plays. The purpose of most of the meetings and "initiatives" was to delay the return of Zelaya until the coup had consolidated power. The State Department never issued a finding that a coup had taken place because they had to keep the aid flowing to the coup leaders and it did so through mechanisms such as IMF loans. Cutting off non-humanitarian aid was strictly for public consumption.

What nearly thwarted their plans was the surprising strength of the resistance and Zelaya's courage in returning to Honduras. That's why the "intervention" of Thomas Shannon was needed. The fact that the so-called agreement to return Zelaya to the presidency was immediately betrayed shows that it was intended to diminish his credibility. Now everything is focused on the phony elections which will establish the coup leaders as a credible government. Once established, unfortunately, the reign of terror will worsen and we can count on the Obama administration to continue its policy of silence on the murders and tortures taking place now.

Progressives should carry out a clear-headed analysis of U.S. imperial strategy. The purpose of the Honduran coup is to reaffirm the neoliberal model of exploitation which had been threatened by the rise of populist movements in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and elsewhere in Latin America. With Obama's establishment of military bases in Columbia and redeployment of the Navy's Fourth Fleet in the Caribbean, he is setting the stage for military intervention in Venezuela. Once the election in Honduras confirms the golpistas in power, the signal will be sent to the right-wing forces in Latin America that they will receive covert U.S. support to re-establish dictatorships.

But, just as the Honduran people made a surprising show of nonviolent resistance, the populist movements in Latin America may prove quite stubborn. Their first breath of freedom and democracy in centuries could give them the strength to make an effective resistance to a return to U.S. hegemony, "smart power" be damned.

Obama is merely another of the U.S. Presidents who engage in wars against other countries and against the interests of the majority of people living in the U.S. He works for Wall Street and for the military/industrial complex.

obama can't stand up to the honduran generals, much less mcchrystal and patreus. amazing the total lack of courage in this man who holds the same job truman held. honduras' military is simply emulating our iraq surge: bomb the civilian areas where support for the rebels is, then imprison as many as possible of the men of military age who survive. concentrate your reign of terror heavily on the areas where you have the least support, i.e. where the people are poorer and where there is less wealth. your terror serves as a warning to all those whose head might end up on the sharp side of a sword if they denounce or resist the military dictator. i am sure all the usa propoganda services and their minions in the private contract arena will soon begin funnelling money and campaign expertise to the candidate who will best protect the privilege, power, and property of the ruling elite in honduras.

Obama: Selling out Democracy in the USA.

RICH NOBILITY ---- WORLD-WIDE SUPREMACY

Today is election in Honduras, and though most all in the Americas are aware that it was impossible for Zelaya to change the Constitution so he could stay in office, know for a fact that Zelaya never said he wanted to stay in office, comes now Al Jazeera News to state the following,

"Zelaya had called for a vote asking the public whether they would support attempts to remove the one-term limit for the presidency set out in the constitution."

For Al Jazeera News is owned by the Qatar rich nobility, most of the land and wealth in Central America is owned by Central America rich nobility, and what the military coup d’etat is all about is the U.S. rich nobility protecting the Honduras rich nobility.

For in all of mainstream media,never do see mentioned a word about the rich or the rich nobility. Nobility meaning people with wealth and power for generations you see.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/11/2009112905529524957.html

"Bogus Honduran Elections
Hypocrites. US, Costa Rica, Panama, Perú, Colombia & Israel. The only nations to recognize the illegal elections"

by Eva Golinger, chavezcode.com, Nov 29, 2009

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16327

The first paragraph of the article and excerpted text is linked in the GR copy, btw.

QUOTE:

"What are we going to do, sit for four years and just condemn the coup?" a senior U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told reporters in Washington.

The true divides in Latin America - between justice and injustice, democracy and dictatorship, human rights and corporate rights, people's power and imperial domination - have never been more visible than today. People's movements throughout the region to revolutionize corrupt, unequal systems that have isolated and excluded the vast majority in Latin American nations, are successfully taking power democratically and building new models of economic and social justice. Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Ecuador are the vanguard of these movements, with other nations such as Uruguay and Argentina moving at a slower pace towards change.

The region has historically been plagued by brutal US intervention, seeking at all costs to dominate the natural and strategic resources contained in this vast, abundant territory. With the exception of the defiant Cuban Revolution, Washington achieved control over puppet regimes placed throughout Latin America by the end of the twentieth century. When Hugo Chávez won the presidency in 1998 and the Bolivarian Revolution began to root, the balance of power and imperial control over the region started to weaken. Eight years of Bush/Cheney brought coup d'etats back to the region, in Venezuela in 2002 against President Chávez and Haiti in 2004 against President Aristide. The former was defeated by a mass popular uprising, the latter succeeded in ousting a president no longer convenient to Washington's interests.

Despite the Bush administration's efforts to neutralize the spread of revolution in Latin America through coups, economic sabotages, media warfare, psychological operations, electoral interventions and an increasing military presence, nations right across the border such as Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala elected leftist-leaning presidents. Latin American integration solidified with UNASUR (the union of South American nations) and ALBA (the Bolivarian Alliance of the Americas), and Washington's grip on power began to slip away.

Henry Kissinger said in the seventies, "if we can't control Latin America, how can we dominate the world?" This imperial vision is more evident today than ever before. Obama's presence in the White House was erroneously viewed by many in the region as a sign of an end to US aggression in the world, and especially here, in Latin America. At least, many believed, Obama would downscale the growing tensions with its neighbors to the south. In fact, he himself, the new president of the United States, made allusion to such changes.

But now, the Obama administration's "Smart Power" strategy has been unmasked. The handshakes, smiles, gifts and promises of "no intervention" and "a new era" made by President Obama himself to leaders of Latin American nations last Spring at the Summit of the Americas meeting in Trinidad have unraveled and turned into cynical gestures of hypocrisy. When Obama came to power, Washington's reputation in the region was at an all-time low. The meager attempts to "change" the North-South relationship in the Americas have made things worse and reaffirmed that Kissinger's vision of control over this region is a state policy, irrespective of party affiliation or public discourse.

Washington's role in the coup in Honduras against President Zelaya has been evident from day one. The continual funding of coup leaders, the US military presence at the Soto Cano base in Honduras, the ongoing meetings between State Department officials and the US Ambassador in Honduras, Hugo Llorens, with coup leaders, and the cynical attempts to force "mediation" and "negotiation" between the coup leaders and the legitimate government of Honduras, have provided clear evidence of Washington's intentions to consolidate this new form of "smart coup". The Obama administration's initial public insistence on Zelaya's legitimacy as president of Honduras quickly faded after the first weeks of the coup. Calls for "restitution of democratic and constitutional order" became weak whispers repeated by the monotone voices of State Department spokesmen.

The imposition of Costan Rican president Oscar Arias - a staunch ally of neoliberalism and imperialism -to "mediate" the negotiation ordered by Washington between coup leaders and President Zelaya was a circus. At the time, it was apparent that Washington was engaging in a "buying time" strategy, pandering to the coup leaders while publicly "working" to resolve the conflict in Honduras. Arias' insincerity and complicity in the coup was evident from the very morning of Zelaya's violent kidnapping and forced exile. The Pentagon, State Department and CIA officials present on the Soto Cano base, which is controlled by Washington, arranged for Zelaya's transport to Costa Rica. Arias had subserviently agreed to refuge the illegally ousted president and to not detain those who kidnapped him and piloted the plane that - in violation of international law - landed in Costa Rican territority.

END QUOTE

The rest will be quoted in my next post.

This is to complete quoting Eva Golinger's aritcle linked in my above post.

QUOTE:

Today, Oscar Arias has called on all nations to "recognize" the illegal and illegitimate elections occurring in Honduras. Why not? he says, if there is no fraud or irregularity, "why not recognize the newly elected president?" The State Department and even President Obama himself have said the same thing, and are calling on all nations - pressuring - to recognize a regime that will be elected under a dictatorship. Seems that fraud and irregularity are already present, considering that today, no democracy exists in Honduras that would permit proper conditions for an electoral process. Not to mention that the State Department admitted to funding the elections and campaigns in Honduras weeks ago. And the "international observers" sent to witness and provide "credibility" to the illegal process are all agencies and agents of empire. The International Republican Institute and National Democratic Institute, both agencies created to filter funding from USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to political parties abroad in order to promote US agenda, not only funded those groups involved in the Honduran coup, but now are "observing" the elections. Terrorist groups such as UnoAmerica, led by Venezuelan coup leader Alejando Peña Esclusa, have also sent "observers" to Honduras. Miami-Cuban terrorist and criminal Adolfo Franco, former USAID director, is another "heavyweight" on the list of electoral observers in Honduras today.

But the Organization of American States (OAS) and Carter Center, hardly "leftist" entities, have condemned the electoral process as illegitimate and refused to send observers. So has the United Nations and the European Union, as well as UNASUR and ALBA.

Washington stands alone, with its right-wing puppet states in Colombia, Panamá, Perú, Costa Rica and Israel, as the only nations to have publicly indicated recognition of the electoral process in Honduras and the future regime. A high-level State Department official cynically declared to the Washington Post, "What are we going to do, sit for four years and just condemn the coup?" Well, Washington has sat for 50 years and refused to recognize the Cuban government. But that's because the Cuban government is not convenient for Washington. The Honduran dictatorship is.

The Honduran resistance movement is boycotting the elections, calling on people to abstain from participating in an illegal process. The streets of Honduras have been taken over by thousands of military forces, under control of the coup regime and the Pentagon. With advanced weapons technology from Israel, the coup regime is prepared to massively repress and brutalize any who attempt to resist the electoral process. We must remain vigilant and stand with the people of Honduras in the face of the immense danger surrounding them. Today's elections are a second coup d'etat against the Honduran people, this time openly designed, promoted, funded and supported by Washington. Whatever the result, no justice will be brought to Honduras until Washington's intervention ceases.

END QUOTE

Democracy in any country is not good for the empire. Imperialism prefers dictators and tyrants.
Hoa binh

The following is another very good article on the situation in Honduras, but not so much specifically that, not this topic alone, for what the interview the article's about tells us about U.S. foreign policy towards South and Latin America for around two centuries, though perhaps especially since a speech by "Republican U.S. President James Monroe" to Europeans on Dec. 2, 1823. The article on the interview is not long, but is certainly convincing or persuasive.

"Honduras, Colombia, Cuba: the United States are Sticking with the Monroe Doctrine
Interview with Arnold August"

by Karine Walsh, Nov. 27, 2009

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16302

I'd excerpt some of the article, but given that it's copyrighted to GlobalResearch.ca, which requires that all such articles be fully quoted, or not quoted from at all, and I already quoted a couple of articles in posts further above, I won't quote another one in the same CD page.

I'm not really sure that this is what the copyright notice says, for it reads, "The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed". CRG, btw, is the acronym for the full name of the website, which I usually refer to as GR, based on the domain name in the URL(s).

If we excerpt from an article without modifying any of the excerpted text, while respecting the conditions for the title, author, source and author's copyright, then would this be considered modifying the text, since it wouldn't be fully quoted, or not? I'm not sure, but guess that it would or at least could be considered modification of the text, which is why I refrain from excerpting from articles at GR when they're copyrighted GR (CRG). In that case, I'll either quote the whole article, or only provide the title, author's name, and link.

The article provides an appreciable statement regarding the length of this, since the start, unending U.S. imperialism and hegemony vis-a-vis South and Latin American countries and their populations. And Americans who bitch about the poor of Mexico and other countries stricken with economic doom trying to come and succeeding in coming to the US to try to find enough income to survive and to be able to send what they can back to their economically suffering families should really give this LONG history of the U.S. against So. and Latin countries and populations some very serious thought, and then become solidaire with these people who don't come to the U.S. to harm anyone.

The U.S. government, rogue as it has long been, and its real ruling "elites", these imperialist, ... and greedy people who are [ruthless] are the enemies of us all. They, not the poor trying to survive, are the enemy!

This is a clear signal to all governments in Latin America: US-sponsored rollback of democracy is threatened everywhere.

I just finished reading the following article, which may be of interest to readers at CD.

"The Plot Thickens: Honduran Coup Regime and Landowning Elites Enlist the Support of Foreign Paramilitaries"

by Reed M. Kurtz, NACLA, Oct. 21, 2009

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=15800

NACLA is the North American Congress on Latin America, nacla.org, and this is the first time I've read one of their article. I know nothing about this organisation, but this article seems important.

QUOTE:

Even more evidence has come to light regarding the desperation and disregard for human rights of the Honduran coup regime and its elite backers. On Friday, October 9 a United Nations human rights panel issued a warning concerning the presence of contracted foreign paramilitary forces operating inside the troubled country. According to the UN Working Group on the use of mercenaries, an estimated 40 members of the infamous United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) have been hired by wealthy Honduran landowners to defend themselves "from further violence between supporters of the de facto government and those of the deposed President Manuel Zelaya."

As Zelaya's Foreign Minister Patricia Rodas notes, it is widely believed that these mercenaries are being used to "do the dirty jobs that the armed forces refuse to do." In addition, the panel established direct links between President Roberto Micheletti's coup-installed government and foreign paramilitaries, stating that an additional group of 120 hired soldiers from several countries throughout the region had been created to provide support for the coup regime. This report confirms allegations made by the Colombian newspaper El Tiempo back in September.

Noting that Honduras is a signatory to the international convention against the use of mercenaries, the panel, comprised of a diverse array of security and human rights experts, expressed its deep concern and called upon the Honduran golpistas to take action against the use of paramilitaries inside Honduran territory. In response, Micheletti rejected the allegations, denying any recruitment of paramilitaries for protection.

This report represents yet another condemnation from the international community of the de facto Honduran government and offers further evidence of the degree to which Micheletti's regime and its supporters have undermined democracy and human rights in the region. The AUC, essentially an umbrella organization of various right-wing death squads, many of which also collaborate with Colombian drug traffickers, is one of the region's most notorious paramilitary organizations and is classified as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department. Supposedly "demobilized" in 2006, the AUC has largely continued to carry out its drug-dealing activities and campaign of violence and intimidation against campesinos, indigenous peoples, stigmatized social groups such as homosexuals and prostitutes, labor organizers, critical journalists, and human rights advocates.

The AUC has also been directly and indirectly linked to numerous powerful elites and business interests in Colombia, including many close to President Álvaro Uribe's administration, and is said to operate "parallel" to the Colombian military. (See "Country Summary: Colombia." Human Rights Watch. January 2008.) The AUC usually presents itself as an alternative to the leftist guerrillas of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). It targets many left-leaning groups, which it generally refers to as "FARC sympathizers," a characterization often repeated by Uribe himself and by members of his government, in order to discredit those groups and justify the brutal activities of the AUC. Above all, however, most of those targeted by the AUC are chosen precisely because their efforts on behalf of social justice and their resistance to neoliberal policies are in direct opposition to the interests of the AUC's elite backers.

Accordingly, the linkages connecting the Honduran military regime, powerful members of the country's landed elite, and right-wing Colombian paramilitaries are extremely troubling but not altogether surprising. Back on July 4, before any evidence of direct collaboration with Colombian narco-terrorists had emerged, journalist Al Giordano noted that the Honduran regime was in the process of making itself into a "rogue narco-state," shutting itself off from the international community while allying with the most shadowy and reactionary sectors of the Latin American right. Among its prominent supporters have been Rafael Hernández Nodarse, a millionaire arms trafficker with ties to Cuban terrorist Luis Posada Carriles, and Otto Reich, a Washington super-hawk who played a prominent role in Iran-Contra affair. All these parties share an agenda of preserving unjust wealth and resource distributions while waging total war against social democracy using any means necessary. Honduras merely represents the most recent arena in which this war is being waged.

The right's problem with Zelaya has never been that he tried to reform his country's deeply flawed constitution ("the worst in the world," according to Costa Rican President Óscar Arias), but because, according to Micheletti himself, he "became friends with Daniel Ortega, Chávez, Correa, Evo Morales. ... He went to the left." In other words, Micheletti is using the same tactics of "guilt by association" that his AUC allies use to justify their violence, only this time the "guilt" consists of association with other popular, democratically elected heads of state in the region. Nevertheless, the message and the effect are still the same: If you oppose us, and what we stand for, we will take you down with force.

But whereas the reactionary elites in the region are disposed to using violence, intimidation, and the contracting of paramilitaries to impose their will, those on the Latin American left, the people for whom Morales, Chávez, and Zelaya are merely elected representatives, have increasingly turned to strategies of nonviolence, popular organization, and civil resistance in their struggles for justice and democracy. The degree to which the popular left—and its leaders—continue to adhere to the values of peace, justice, and solidarity will ultimately decide whether or not the popular movement achieves its goals, not only here and now in Honduras, but in all of Latin America.

Reed M. Kurtz is a NACLA Research Associate.

END QUOTE

There are several links in the article, Guardian, UK, Narconews.com, TheNation.com, and democracynow.org, and El Tempo, though not in this order.

A WARNING TO ALL CIVILIAN LEADERS IN LATIN AMERICA: CONTROL YOU MILITARY.

The lesson for Latin America is very simple. Popular reforms can not take place unless the US trained military, especially the officer corps, has been replaced. Lula in Brazil, for example, is still hemmed in by the same military which created the fascist coup in 1964. The new leftist governments of El Salvador, Nicaragua and Guatemala were unable to come to Zelaya's aid because they are still occupied by School of the Americas officers.

I do not presume to know how to deal with the hangover of fascist militaries all over Latin America, but that is what we, and they, have most to be aware of.

The comments attacking this article are over the top. Yes, there are some errors in the article - and you've rightly corrected some of them - that doesn't make it a propaganda piece or "sycophantic punditry".

From the title on the article condemns the Obama administration for going along with the coup - even the title of the article is "Selling out democracy in Honduras" and the sub-heading condemns Obama for being the only head of an elected government who'll recognise elections run by a coup regime.

Also some of the things you claim are 'lies' are not lies at all

e.g

e.g "LIE 2
“there had been some promising signs that Obama was going to remain true to his pledge”"

There were some promising signs initially - an Obama administration official was quoted as saying that the admin saw Zelaya as the "only legitimate President of Honduras" and that "we see no other"
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE55R2AY20090628

and the State Department did say it wouldn't recognise elections unless Zelaya was restored first, which you'd have seen if you'd clicked the link to the State Department statement of 3rd September in the article
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2009/sept/128608.htm

but then changed its position later.

That may or may not all have been public relations and spin to hide the Obama administration backing it from the start. It could also be that Obama caved in to Republican (and right wing Democrat) pressure, as the article suggests, which would be no less shameful. That's a difference of interpretation of the facts, not a lie.

"LIE 6
“This firm U.S. reaction apparently "privately stunned" the coup leaders”

LIGHT: Clearly no surprises in this CIA coup dictatorship, not even for those they tried to fool, as so self-evident was the fraud."

That's your opinion - and you might be right - but much of the press said the coup leaders were "privately stunned" by the State Department initially saying it wouldnt recognise election results unless Zelaya was restored first. There is no lie there, just a difference of opinion over whether the Obama administration's change in public statements show a change of policy, caving in to the Republicans, or not.

RICH NOBILITY ---- COUP DICTATORSHIP

In 1822 the rich nobility of Spain gave all the land in Honduras to the rich nobility who ruled the military in Honduras, all Europeans of rich and noble decent. And so it is today, with most all the land still owned by the rich nobility, a majority being blood descendents of the founding fathers of Honduras.

And so, with the rich nobility manifesto about to be replaced with a real Constitution in Honduras, the rich nobility called their generals together and ordered them to execute a coup d’etat being sure to create as much bloodshed, deadly force and terrorism as possible. So the generals asked the CIA to help maximize the torture and brutality. And to make the coup looked as much as possible like a CIA coup, as everyone knows how expert the CIA is at torture and the gang-rapping of women prisoners. Shots to the head being the hallmark and calling card of the CIA.

Comes now this fiction article by fiction teller Isabel, and she to paint a word picture illusion that the coup d’etat is only about politicians. Not one word about the generals, not a word about the rich nobility who give all orders to the generals, but all about Obama being the ring leader of a bunch of renegade politicians.

Most profound, Obama refused all phone calls and requests for meeting from President Zelaya, during the entire coup made only two brief remarks about the coup, and yet this article of darkness and confusion has Obama on top of it all and controlling each step of the way.

Forget all the mumbo jumbo, this is dead simple:

Zelaya deposed at gunpoint in early morning by military and forced to board a plane in his jammies.

Military leaders (many of whom trained by the USA at the School of Asssasins)install Michelletti as de-facto Pres.

Coup is officially condemned by virtually all countries, as well as the EU. USA stops short of official condemnation and it becomes clear that USA is supporting coup.

Given the Empire's long history of supporting this sort of thing it is no surprise. Rather textbook really, but this time the smoke and mirrors have fooled many.

When a US official utters the word "democracy" and "move forward" we know they are acting to support un-democratic measures; I consider them my enemies. The Orwellian doublespeak is the rule not the exception.

socialist is right.

rcphoenix - you claim this wasnt a military coup. So why were the army shooting unarmed people dead in the streets? Why have they been dragged away by the army and police when protesting and their bodies found later, bearing the marks of torture according to the Inter American Commission on Human Rights?

All you provide evidence for is that one faction in the Liberal party carried out a military coup against the elected President, who was also from the Liberal party - not that there was no coup

You claim Zelayas supporters would have no chance in a free election. So how do you explain the fact that in polls 60% of Hondurans say they oppose the coup against Zelaya and two-thirds of them support Zelaya.
http://www.gqrr.com/index.php?ID=2399