Replies

Have thought about your attempt at refuting Mr. Hendrickson’s article.

Your whole argument hinges on a Google machine translation of a portion of their constitution and ridicule of some of the statements that Mr. Hendrickson made as being unsubstantiated. I am not fluent in Spanish and it appears that you are not either, since you mentioned the google translator.

I use machine translations daily and find Google’s translator very good. But the structure of the English language and Spanish are very different. Anyone who has used machine translators understands that context is often distorted by this structural difference.

Some Constitutional scholars here in the U.S. have stated that his removal was lawful.

Rather than look at a sentence in the Constitution of Honduras, I am looking at the events as they unfold in Honduras.

There is evidence that Zelaya used whether a patient at a hospital supported the constitutional changes or not to deny medical treatment. (Why do you think Obozo is so committed to his Healthcare legislation and to having the FDA control U.S. food production- answer - they are hammers to subject a people) This is about a planned decent into totalitarianism.

I am not questioning your motives, but find it odd here to defend the puppet of Chavez and Lula (also Obozo) on this forum.

The pattern of Zelaya’s actions will eventually be exposed as will Obozo’s lies, treachery, deceit and treason. Both will ultimately be exposed and discredited.

Respectfully,

If you use the Googlebot daily then you know that its translations are so bad that they are almost comical.

I suggested using the Google translator because I figured you might not read Spanish. The translations I provided are my own, except the legislative decree, which someone else did but is pretty close to mine.

I do use the Google translator because it makes translating Spanish articles a lot easier. First I translate using the Googlebot, then I go back sentence by sentence and correct the translation. That way I just have to type the corrections, not the whole bloody article.

Some Constitutional scholars here in the U.S. have stated that his removal was lawful.

Rather than look at a sentence in the Constitution of Honduras, I am looking at the events as they unfold in Honduras.

The whole issue is the constitutionality of removing and replacing Zelaya. To determine that, you have to look at the Constitution, one sentence or the whole thing. And because my interpretation of the Constitution is different from "some Constitutional scholars," that doesn't make it wrong.

The problem with citing anecdotal evidence against Zelaya is that Zelaya's side can make accusations, too.

I do not defend Zelaya. I have never defended Zelaya. In my first post on this subject in early July, I called him a "fascist thug" and my opinion hasn't changed.

But I do defend the Constitution. It was violated on June 28th and the interim government has continued to violate it, suspending a number of Constitutional articles in the past month. And I expect that the interim government will violate more of the Constitution in the coming weeks.

And BTW, I think Obama is an unqualified jerk. But what do his moves have to do with what Hondurans did on June 28th?