Wikipedia repeating pro-coup propaganda on Honduras.

What? Wikipedia has a pro-mainstream US bias?

Someone catch me while I faint....

Yet another reason why Wiki is only good for pop culture/t.v. references.

Well you can always start a page on dkospedia

http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Special:Search?search=coup+in+Honduras&go...

nevermind, they finally changed the president to "unresolved"

In Latin America, they recognize this as media terrorism. Unfortunately, most people are gullible and easily swayed by this disinformation. Just look at the AP wire. It is chalk full of disinfo.

ikat381: Wikipedia has listed Roberto Micheletti as the current president of Honduras and has locked out any further edits to the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honduras

Maysie: What? Wikipedia has a pro-mainstream US bias?

What do you think the "mainstream US bias" is on this issue? After all, the president of the US -- arguably the spokesperson for the mainstream -- said, "We believe that the coup was not legal and that President Zelaya remains the democratically elected president there."

News Flash for TorontoProf: Empires can say one thing and do another. Why, it's just like the lying liars we have up here.

The question was not what the US is doing, but rather where US mainstream bias lies. Obama's pronouncements, whether or not these pronouncements misrepresent the actions of his administration, both (1) are a pretty good barometer of the US mainstream on most (though of course not all) issues; and (2) affect US mainstream opinion on most (though of course not all) issues. (All of this is insofar as the US mainstream has any opinions on matters of Honduran constitutional law.) Undoubtedly, there are better barometers of US mainstream bias than the president's pronouncements. If anyone can find a plausible barometer of US mainstream opinion that disagrees with Obama's pronouncement, I would be happy to know about it.

The question is, can the US President say one thing while other branches of the US government act to ensure that the Honduran military will retain control of the political future, and their entrenched privileges, of Honduras?

I understand that, if you were an apologist for US imperialism, then you might want to avoid the whole subject of "what the US is doing" altogether. ahaha ha ha.

My intent was to challenge the view that mainstream US bias is pro-coup. I see no evidence for this view, and see some evidence against it. I would be interested in seeing evidence in favour of the view that mainstream US bias is pro-coup.

You raise another set of issues: What are various branches of the US government doing about this issue? Are they acting to ensure that the Honduran military will retain control of the political future, and their entrenched privileges?

Your questions are interesting and important. If you have evidence relating to them, please share it.

The strong connections between the Honduran military and the US military has already been pointed out on one thread or another. There is, of course, a political dimension to this, as we can see in the current crisis. The economic connections, through US-dominated international institutions that enforce neo-liberal economic regimes, are extensive.

Edited to add: more on the connections, from Amy Goodman (on rabble) "Undo the coup"

And, just in case there was any doubt, ...