[ExI] constitution amendments, was: iranian riots all a huge mistake
painlord2k at libero.it
Fri Jul 17 10:10:00 UTC 2009
Jeff Davis ha scritto:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Mirco Romanato<painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:
>> Like trying to illegally change the Constitution with an illegal
>> referendum to remove the limit to the number of presidential mandates.
>> Like in Honduras.
> Factual accuracy problem here.
> The referendum Zelaya called for was NOT about removing the limit on
> presidential terms (the word MIrco wanted in place of "mandates"
> above). It was non-binding, legal, and sought to pose the question to
> Honduran voters whether they would approve the formation of a body to
> update/rewrite/reform the constitution.
The only body that can propose a similar thing is the parliament of
And the Constitution is clear that whoever propose, not only act so, is
out of any office he could have.
If he wanted to change the Constitution, he could ask the Parliament to
call for the referendum. The Parliament said "NO", the Supreme Court
said "NO", the party of the President said "NO", and the majority of the
population said "NO" from what we see.
> The lie re the "illegality" of the referendum was the cover story for
> the coup, you know, like the Iraqi WMDs.
Both "reasons" used only by the news salesmen. Something that fit the
"narrative" they choose to print.
> Standard narrative for US dominated, central American banana republics
> -- military dictatorships posing as democracies.
If GWB had forced a "consultive" not binding referendum to the US
people, against the Senate and the Congress will, against the ruling of
the Supreme Court, about "updating" the Constitution, you would be
But his would fit your "narrative".
More information about the extropy-chat