What is Digg?Sponsored by HTC
You and You and You. view!
youtube.com - You don't need to get a phone. You need a phone that gets you.
86 Comments
- imgeddylee, on 10/26/2009, -0/+16Well now I need to go there and see what the fuss is all about.
- Kisama, on 10/26/2009, -1/+14A coup is when the military ousts the rightful leader and assumes control. Zelaya was ousted by the military under congressional order and the military did just that. The Honduran Congress is running the show now.
- Crimsonsoul343, on 10/26/2009, -4/+16Was it constitutional? I thought they kicked him out without going though the impeachment process.
- govsucks, on 10/26/2009, -3/+10If the democracy wanted to change the constitution to limit free speech, should it be allowed or should people who love liberty try to stop them?
There was a time in the U.S. that the MAJORITY of people were OK with slavery. Democracy is not always that great. Freedom is. - falconear, on 10/26/2009, -1/+6You know what this is really about...they're making the argument of why it's OK there as a substitute to talk about it happening here. A military takeover seems to be one of the wishful thinking dreams of the right these days...
- sonnybobiche, on 10/26/2009, -3/+8There is NO impeachment provision in the Honduran constitution in cases where the president attempts serve for another term. The precise language of the constitution states that he will be "immediately removed from office." No trial, no nothing.
THAT is how much they don't like dictators. - zeex, on 10/26/2009, -6/+11What's wrong with digg today?! Why are so many guys calling the Honduran coup constitutional?!
Even the Honduran military admitted it was breaking the law!!
http://www.webcitation.org/5jb00TM3J
Get out of my Digg liars!! - TheOneKen, on 10/26/2009, -19/+24It's so sad what we've done to the poor people of Honduras, all for throwing out a would-be dictator using constitutional means.
- strictnein, on 10/26/2009, -0/+4There sure are a lot of Honduran constitutional scholars on digg...
- newes, on 10/26/2009, -0/+4I'm going there in 3 weeks. I can't wait, should be a good trip.
- Lavarock, on 10/26/2009, -12/+16in a military coup
- jeffwmartin, on 10/26/2009, -0/+4I was on Roatan about a month ago. It's a beautiful place. I contributed quite a bit to the tourism economy by buying many Salva Vidas (the national beer).
- Agamemnon582bc, on 10/26/2009, -2/+6You're an idiot. The Honduran JUDICIAL SYSTEM ousted Zelaya. The military was under the orders from the Honduran government to remove him. Oh yeah, that sounds like the work of a military coup to me! /s
Still glad to see that immense ignorance is still floating around after a COMPLETELY LEGAL ousting of a douchebag president. Guess the ***** what, America; we Hondurans? We're just fine with what happened. And just because what's considered a "coup" or a "wrongful impeachment" in one country certainly doesn't mean it then applies to ALL countries. Obama and other world leaders really embarrassed their selves when they condemned the removing of Zelaya. Thanks guys, glad you could all ignore a country's laws simply because you don't understand them. - Kisama, on 10/26/2009, -0/+4Zeex, here:
ARTICULO 239.- El ciudadano que haya desempeñado la titularidad del Poder Ejecutivo no podrá ser Presidente o Vicepresidente de la República.
El que quebrante esta disposición o proponga su reforma, así como aquellos que lo apoyen directa o indirectamente, cesarán de inmediato en el desempeño de sus respectivos cargos y quedarán inhabilitados por diez (10) años para el ejercicio de toda función pública.
http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Honduras/ ... - zeex, on 10/26/2009, -0/+475% of the population or 75% of the parliament?
It's just that, for you to come up with 75% of the population would mean that there was a referendum about kicking zelaya out that I don't know about...
That's not really true is it? - Agamemnon582bc, on 10/26/2009, -1/+4@mickstephenson: If you're RIGGING votes, it's pretty ***** clear that it's time for you to go, ESPECIALLY if you do it in front of everyone. Need I remind you the US has ousted presidents for doing even less, and yet everyone is having a bitchfest about removing Zelaya, whose corruption was well known amongst the Honduran people (I would be one of those people by the way). So when I see the outside party speaking on ***** they don't know about or people all crying calamity and foul because the laws aren't exactly the same as they are in the US, then I could give less of a ***** about being all "nice." Seriously, like you came into this topic with an attempt at logic instead of rather pushing forward your agenda. ***** you twice and the horse you rode in on. We STILL have corrupt news sources putting out false information behind what happened simply because the rest of the world was not okay with ousting a potential dictator. I'm sure if there was a law like this in the US and we ousted Bush that we'd all be just fine with this. That's an accurate comparison by the way. Thanks for your time in distorting what ever view point of "democracy" you have, especially if you think it should scum should be given "fair rights."
It's like Saddam's execution. Why was their a trial before hand? There was plenty of surmountable evidence against him. Even his own testimonies. It's a shame the soldier who found him didn't shoot him in the face when he had the chance. Would've saved the courts and the people a whole lot of trouble and money. Oh hey, just like the Honduran government did when they told a rat he had to leave the country. - ChileanGoD, on 10/26/2009, -3/+6WTF with all the dictator calling? If the majority chooses a person, that's democracy. Even if they choose the wrong one.
What if the population of a country wants to change it's constitution? On what basis would you stop them to do so? Saying that the past generations knew what was best for the future generations until the end of time? - MikeSC6, on 10/26/2009, -0/+3I suggest you find out what this is actually about.
This is about an elected president who wanted to hold a non-binding referendum over the issue of re-electing people who have held office, to give people a chance to say whether they wanted these restrictions or not.
The president in question was upfront about his own unwillingness to stand again- changing the constitution wouldn't give him any personal gain.
It's strange for someone called "govsucks" to advocate having an unelected military regime in control of the state rather than those who were voted in. The government sucks when it's a democracy but not when it's a dictatorship?
All this free speech talk is obfuscation- there was no plan to limit free speech. It was a plan to hold a referendum so that could people could exercise their freedom of speech.
As opposed to the coup-regime, who imposed restrictions all over the place and have killed protesters, a pretty extreme way to curtail *their* freedom of speech. - zeex, on 10/26/2009, -13/+16@TheOneKen
what?!?!
I can't beleive you're being dugg up. That stuff you're saying is a lie.
There's nothing constitutional about kicking the president out without a strong reason to it, and forging a resignation letter supposedly signed by Zelaya.
And when I say "without a strong reason" I mean how would someone kick a president for organizing a national referendum about prolonging the presidential one more term? (The constitution of honduras only allows one term, not two consecutive terms)
They didn't even let the referendum start!
The only way for this coup to be justifiable is if the people approved the second consecutive term that would not apply to the current president, Zelaya, (not a problem here) and the same president (Zelaya) would force his reelection! Only then a military coup is justifiable! But they didn't do that, did they? They interrupted a referendum which is unconstitutional, forged a resignation letter, which is a crime and took over the country.
Please stop the "Would-be dictator" talk, it hurts to see people so blindly misinformed. - sonnybobiche, on 10/26/2009, -0/+3It's a beautiful country! It's also an extremely popular destination for wealthy Europeans. I'm not really sure what you're talking about.
- Agamemnon582bc, on 10/26/2009, -1/+4@mickstephenson: This is Honduras, not the US, you idiot. Honduras won its democracy only thirty years ago. You know what American politics was like thirty years after winning their independence? Some states were ready to go right back to Britain. Laws were enacted to ENSURE that any attempt to do anything underhanded within Honduran politics means that you're automatically ousted. Why? Because if you are doing something underhanded, guess what, it sure as ***** isn't being done with the interest of the people!
- sonnybobiche, on 10/26/2009, -1/+4You seem to fundamentally misunderstand what happened. The military didn't act unilaterally. They were ordered to remove Zelaya from power by the Congress and the Supreme Court. This is all constitutional.
Now we get to the issue of the exile, in which you are ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. Zelaya should not have, legally speaking, been exiled from the country. He should have been made to stand trial in Honduras. However, the Congress suspected that allowing him to remain in the country would be extremely dangerous, as he had already shown himself willing to disobey the law by rallying a mob. They were afraid that HE would forcefully take over the government. (Something that has happened in many, many countries, the latest being Venezuela.) - inactive, on 10/26/2009, -2/+4Honduras did everything by the book, they followed their constitution, their Congress and Judicial system ousted their president, and we have made them a pariah for it.
Yet Iran rigs an election and beats and murders their own people in the street and we reward them with dialogue. - lolerskate, on 10/26/2009, -3/+5Yes they protected their constitution...then suspended it and emprisoned without charges those that supported zelaya and crack a few skulls along the way, viva la revolucion!
- sonnybobiche, on 10/26/2009, -6/+8FTA: "Much of the world, including the U.S. and all of Honduras' neighbors, have refused to recognize the Micheletti regime."
1) This makes me seriously question Obama's judgment. Don't make excuses for him; he's dead wrong, and it's a very serious mistake.
2) It's not a "Micheletti regime." It's not a regime at all. It's the same government as before, minus the constitutionally-removed Zelaya, plus the constitutionally-appointed next-in-line: Micheletti. - inactive, on 10/26/2009, -0/+2But the military didn't take control of the country. Of course the guys with guns are going to do it no matter what.
- WraTH017, on 10/26/2009, -0/+2She's probably ok. Things are pretty calm over there... Sure, there are small protests here and there but it's nothing serious. Crime in Honduras has always been pretty bad though, i'd be more concerned about that then the protests.
- LinuxCobra, on 10/26/2009, -2/+4Lavarock you are really a dumbass... if it was a military coup the military would be in charge right now. It was the courts the ordered him to be ousted.
- sonnybobiche, on 10/26/2009, -4/+6Is defying the ruling of the supreme court and leading a mob of supporters into an air base to retrieve ballots donated by Hugo Chavez reason enough? No? Perhaps the fact that the constitution explicitly states that any president who makes any attempt to serve more than one term "will be IMMEDIATELY removed from office"?
- TheOneKen, on 10/28/2009, -0/+2Those of you that support Zaleya are operating under the assumption that whatever the majority of people want in a country, is good and should be implemented. So-called 'Republican' governments are meant to *limit* the power of the mob to impose its rule on the rest of us, and term limits are a critical means of doing so. Absolutist democracy is NOT a good thing.
- sonnybobiche, on 10/26/2009, -1/+3The reason I was comparing Section 1 Article 1 of the Constitution is because it is approximately as important as their "no second terms" article is to them. Think of it this way: The first amendment (very important, yes?) is just an AMENDMENT to the constitution. It could be removed, if there existed the political will to do it. Imagine how many orders of magnitude more important Section 1 Article 1 is.
Similarly, the "no second terms" law is an Article of the Honduran constitution.
El que quebrante esta disposición o proponga su reforma, así como aquellos que lo apoyen directa o indirectamente, cesarán de inmediato en el desempeño de sus respectivos cargos y quedarán inhabilitados por diez (10) años para el ejercicio de toda función pública.
I'm a native speaker, so I feel comfortable translating:
He who changes this position or proposes its reform, along with those who assist him directly or indirectly, will immediately cede their respective offices and will be prevented from exercising any public function for 10 years. - sonnybobiche, on 10/26/2009, -0/+2@mickstephenson: There's a reason for term limits. People who get into power don't like letting go. If they can't buy the votes, they'll force the votes. And if they can't do that, they'll fake the votes.
Term limits are a good thing. - ChileanGoD, on 10/26/2009, -3/+5You're argument is no better than saying is not good to allow to change the constitution so anyone can random rape anyone without any retribution. Of course that's not a good change and you need people that are conscious and well informed of the decisions they take.
I agree the democracy is not always that great. I take the second term of Bush as the most glorious example of that. But don't let your libertarian bias blind you my friend. Some stuff can be well done by government. - sonnybobiche, on 10/26/2009, -0/+2@mickstephenson: I agree that one term is extremely short. Perhaps to the point of being a hindrance. That's not the point.
The point is that they so feared a dictator that they wrote this article into their constitution. Honduran law is that nobody can run for more than one term, and than nobody can try to change that law.
We're not debating the merits of the law; it's written. We're debating whether Zelaya broke the law, and whether the rest of the government upheld it by removing him from power. - ChileanGoD, on 10/26/2009, -1/+3Burn the witch!
- MikeSC6, on 10/26/2009, -0/+2So why not give people the FREEDOM to vote for who they like, whether they have held office already or not?
- govsucks, on 10/26/2009, -5/+6What wrong with a fat ass collectivist printing his own ballots and holding an election in direct opposition to the ruling of the Honduran supreme court?
/s - govsucks, on 10/26/2009, -3/+4zeex,
its a hypothetical question. How you answer it determines what level of totalitarian ***** you are. See below. - pinchduck, on 10/26/2009, -1/+2Don't visit a politically unstable third world country? Darn. Time to unpack my bags.
- zeex, on 10/26/2009, -2/+4It's not even "dictator" they're calling...it's "would-be dictator" or "dictator want-to-be" as if saying that justifies the illegal and trigger happy coup d'etat it was.
- copypastry, on 10/26/2009, -0/+1All I can think of is Tropico 3.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_ZoPWlXhls&fea ...
Pardon the absolutely out of place German narration. - zeex, on 10/26/2009, -2/+3"will be IMMEDIATELY removed from office"?
I want you to copy and paste that exact sentence from the Honduran Constitution ...in it's original language! - powerse5, on 10/26/2009, -0/+1my friend just went to hoduras to help out with aide... i havent heard from her since she left, i hope shes ok :(
- newes, on 10/26/2009, -0/+1I'll be on Roatan in a few weeks!
- newes, on 10/26/2009, -0/+1It's a great place to go scuba diving too.
- zeex, on 10/26/2009, -0/+1Thanks Kisama.
sonnybobiche already pasted that on another comment, and I made my response to him there. - MrSteamTank, on 10/26/2009, -2/+3It doesn't matter. Too many Americans couldn't give a rats ass about all the military coups throughout the world. Reagan caused most of the ones in Latin America and he's a ***** hero in the US.
- jeffwmartin, on 10/26/2009, -0/+1Make sure to have a few Salva Vidas. Great beer!
- zeex, on 10/26/2009, -1/+2yeah sure, I understand the fear of a civil war, but this very action is the spark that has the potential to start a civil war.
The population approval rates on Zelaya don't show any of this "mob movement", or danger of civil war. we are talking about 55% of the population with 17% being undecided.
....well, I got things to do, I'm out of this.... - wilf_brim, on 10/26/2009, -8/+7This is nothing more than the tourism flack of a dictator want-to-be slamming the governement that didn't allow it. Buried.
-
Show 51 - 89 of 89 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is