Honduras and Colombia: the double standards of Liberalism

Preliminary note: Liberalism as understood on planet Earth, not just in the USA, where it's often used as synonym of Social-Democracy and even Socialism. In other words: Liberalism as the paradigmatic bourgeois ideology of "free market" and "democracy".

Catalan professor, Vincenç Navarro, makes a good analysis at Rebelión of Liberal hypocrisy and double standards by comparing the cases of Honduras and Colombia. In both cases the presidents have tried to modify the legal frame in order to extend their mandates, but while in the case of Honduras many Liberals like the famous Peruvian writer Mario Vargas Llosa have ferviently defended the coup against Zelaya on such grounds, in the case of Colombia, where human rights are a cruel joke and where the president Uribe is a well known narcotrafficant, they have not even raised a finger in protest.

Of course, he does not forget to mention historical examples of this Liberal hypocrisy, as when the Liberal Catalan and Spanish bankers financed the bloody coup of Gral. Franco or when the same kind of Liberal ideologues, like the infamous Milton Friedman, openly supported the criminal takeover of Gral. Pinochet in Chile.

He also denounces the active intervention of Colombian death squads, one of the main pillars of Uribe's fascist (ops, I mean "liberal" and "democratic" - wonder what was I thinking) power in the devastated Colombian narcostate, in the Honduran coup. Intervention that of course has not been denounced by the "liberals" like Vargas Llosa at any moment. He concludes: do you imagine what would have the liberal media said if troops of the Chávez grovernment would have arrived in Honduras to support Zelaya? Their reaction would have been hystrionic! These are examples not just of the deep incoherence of the defenders of individual freedoms but also of their double moral standards, extremely malleable according to their class interests.
.

Doublespeak on Israel

Doublespeak (sometimes called doubletalk) is language constructed to disguise or distort its actual meaning, often resulting in a communication bypass. Doublespeak may take the form of bald euphemisms (e.g., "downsizing" for layoffs) or deliberate ambiguity.

From Wikipedia.

This issue was already adressed by Noam Chomsky in his 1980s pamphlet on Palestine, so it's nothing new, at least for me. But Intifada blog has a good and brief article on it:

The language that absolves Israel.

Take a look.
.

"Antisemitism" (another cartoon)

I know that the few usual Zionist-brainwashed visitors will bring their hands to their heads. In fact it goes for them. I think it's quite funny and I also think that fascism hates humorists.

Source: Desert Peace. Author Carlos Latuff (copyleft).
.

Our rulers' hypocrisy on racism

Found at Desert Peace. Drawing by Carlos Latuff (copyleft).

I can only imagine that the guard in the background is Canada, a country that has the most boot-licking attitude towards Israel and Zionazism.

As you probably know, Canada (first of all), the USA (second) and some European states are boycotting the Durban conference on racism because they do not seem to accept that the main case of outraging racism and apartheid in the world today is Israel.

They fill their mouths with the word "antisemitism" until the term has been dried up of any meaning. And, anyhow, aren't Arabs Semitic too?
.

Hypocrisy? Too obvious.

A forsenic research has shown that we, even the best actor/actress among us, can't actually fake emotions totally. There are muscles in the face that can only react to genuine emotions and, to the trained eye, such details can't but be evident. I bet this study is of great use to poker players and the like but it also shows how hypocrisy can be so obvious for some and therefore cause be cause of discomfort, rather than falsehood-induced comfort.

So why trying to pretend, when it's so obvious? Stop being so hypocritical: it's not worth it.

The most brutal Patriarchy... under US protection.

Human Rights Watch has released a report on how the human rights of women (specially) just do not exist in Saudi Arabia. Under the barbaric Saudi laws, Arab women are denied even the most nimious right, always needing the approval of their male guardian (father, husband...) for absolutely everything.

The report emphasizes that Arabian women lack of right to education, right to employement, right to health, equality under the law, freedom of movement, etc.

Of course such a brutal tyranny, probably one of the most backward and despicable of the whole planet (it also ranks highest in executions per capita, for instance), that has financed and promoted Islamic Fundamentalism all around the World, that is ruled autocratically by an aristocratic gang of fat polygamous men, seconded by an SS-like religious police...

... such a fascist regime is supported by the USA in the name of democracy.

I would laugh wouldn't I be about to cry, sincerely.