Let's see: The military wakes up an elected President in the middle of the night, forces him at gunpoint to a plane, and exiles him. They take over the civilian government, put their own civilian figureheads in place, declare an open-ended curfew, and shoot peaceful demonstrators. But, no, no, it is not a coup, no, no, it is defense of constitutional law. Everyone knows that when a President wants to put up a vote on non-binding resolution to allow consideration of an amendment to the constitution, a poor law-loving country has no choice but to have a takeover by its military. Of course.
Guess what? It's a coup. Duh. There's an impeachment provision in that constitution that pro-coup propagandists claim to love so much. So why not use it? Oh, right--it might be seen as a power play by Honduras's elite. So much better to have the military run your government. Fronted by "civilians" who are so confident, that they can make racist comments to the "negrito" President of the US. (Oh, right, that guy was "punished"--he's no longer the foreign minister, where racism can be a minus, he's not the interior minister, where racism against the indigenous population is a plus.)
I must say, this coup has been handled very well. There has been a full-court propaganda operation in place from the start, denying the obvious--here in the US, I mean, where it counts. Ten years from now, or so, maybe we'll get the truth--maybe Newsweek will cover it--where the clever folks in the "intelligence community" and the PR firms and coup plotters and enablers from the permanent Washington establishment will be "exposed," except for maybe their names which are of course off the record, and there will be tut-tutting about how bad Washington *used to be*, and it'll be a shame that such bad things happened in the past, but isn't it great that the US has a free press so the story can come out, even if it's too late?.... etc.









Discuss