This is why Chávez accuses the CIA of being behind the coup. Zelaya, on the other hand, claims that he had the support of the Obama administration before the weekend and wasn't accusing the USA of being behind the coup.
The excuse for the coup has been a Constitutional referendum. The Army was going to be uncooperative in setting up the polling stations etc, so he sacked the chief of staff. But the parliament and the Supreme Court opposed the president´s move and he didn´t name a replacement.
So the situation is very confused. A man of words and not of deeds is like a garden full of weeds; a man of deeds and not of words is like a garden full of turds — Anonymous
So, if the Referendum had gone ahead it would have been called a "self-coup" by an opposition in control of the legislative and judiciary branches of government. A man of words and not of deeds is like a garden full of weeds; a man of deeds and not of words is like a garden full of turds — Anonymous
Neither side's hands look clean in this, but the Honduran President seems the least-wrong. Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
By the way, watch CNN's Elise Labott trying to back the US administration into an inconsistency:
Background Briefing on the Situation in Honduras
QUESTION: Yeah, but now you're invoking the - I'm sorry, but now you're invoking the constitution to return him. So did you think that what he was doing was in line with the constitution?SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: No, but there's a big distinction here because, on the one instance, we're conducting about conducting a survey, a nonbinding survey; in the other instance, we're talking about the forcible removal of a president from a country. So I think we can distinguish between those terms - those two in terms of what's constitutional and what might be left to institutions.But I think what's important to remember about the survey is that it was just that. It wasn't even a formal vote. It was a nonbinding survey. And the issue of whether it was legitimate or illegal did not revolve around the survey itself. It revolved around who conducted it and whether or not this could be conducted by the government and which institution in the government could conduct it, and whether or not as it's being conducted state security forces could be used to both manage and secure the equipment that was being used for the survey and provide security. And that's where the divide occurred within Honduras. It was about who conducted this survey, with several institutions in Honduras insisting that the Honduran Government could not conduct it, at least not in the way that President Zelaya had suggested.And from our point of view, what was important was not inserting ourselves and trying to make a determination of what was legal or illegal, but trying to insist that the Hondurans find a way to resolve this in a way that was in accord with their constitution.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: No, but there's a big distinction here because, on the one instance, we're conducting about conducting a survey, a nonbinding survey; in the other instance, we're talking about the forcible removal of a president from a country. So I think we can distinguish between those terms - those two in terms of what's constitutional and what might be left to institutions.
But I think what's important to remember about the survey is that it was just that. It wasn't even a formal vote. It was a nonbinding survey. And the issue of whether it was legitimate or illegal did not revolve around the survey itself. It revolved around who conducted it and whether or not this could be conducted by the government and which institution in the government could conduct it, and whether or not as it's being conducted state security forces could be used to both manage and secure the equipment that was being used for the survey and provide security. And that's where the divide occurred within Honduras. It was about who conducted this survey, with several institutions in Honduras insisting that the Honduran Government could not conduct it, at least not in the way that President Zelaya had suggested.
And from our point of view, what was important was not inserting ourselves and trying to make a determination of what was legal or illegal, but trying to insist that the Hondurans find a way to resolve this in a way that was in accord with their constitution.
He claims that there were phone calls into the country from neighbouring coutries, from the OAS, and from the USA which helped stop a coup before the weekend.
QUESTION: Washington Post. There was a report in El Pais newspaper this morning - actually, it was an interview with President Zelaya, in which he said that there had been a coup plot afoot in recent days and it was only stopped by actions of the U.S. Embassy. Can you tell us about that or tell us if that's not correct? SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: I think the only thing we can say at this point is that we were very clear with the different sectors of Honduran political life and Honduras's different political institutions that any resolution to the political conflict in Honduras had to be democratic and constitutional, and that we would not abide or support any extra-constitutional actions.
SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL ONE: I think the only thing we can say at this point is that we were very clear with the different sectors of Honduran political life and Honduras's different political institutions that any resolution to the political conflict in Honduras had to be democratic and constitutional, and that we would not abide or support any extra-constitutional actions.
Maybe Hugo Chavez could shut his whore mouth? Conservatives want live babies so they can raise them to be dead soldiers. - George Carlin
