Monday, September 28, 2009

Why Closing Radio Globo and Cholusat Sur Was RIGHT!

I have been hearing some serious complaints about the closing of Radio Globo and Cholusatsur...and calling it a violation of freedom of press.  If they were not trying to instigate violence I would agree with you, but no radio or media outlet is allowed to create violence in a country whether it is the US or Honduras.

The FCC has revoked licenses of radio stations for things like deceptiveness and lack of candor, evasiveness, is a link to one of those stories.

This gospel station had their license revoked by the FCC in the US for violating public safety...sounds a bit like what Cholusatsur and Globo were doing

These are but two of the many that were available on Google.

So if these can have their license revoked for the things that are clearly much less serious than trying to cause a civil war...remember the fine for Janet Jackson showing her boob on television, then why can't Honduras revoke these licenses for more serious offenses.

Now on the prohibition of public assembly without a permit.

In the US the constitution guarantees the right to assemble peaceably ...the last word being has to be peaceful.  In Honduras, the majority of the demonstrations have NOT been peaceful in any way, shape or form.  They have been quite violent.  So those types of demonstrations are not protected even in the US as a right.  Not only that the US requires a PERMIT in most municipalities to demonstrate even peacefully and that is regardless of the environment politically in the country.  So why should Honduras be held to a different standard? I think they are well within their rights to restrict violent demonstrations and require permits.

The curfew has been a need for public safety within reason.  Last night it was placed at 9pm to 5 am which is reasonable.  The government thus far has been very flexible with people who get caught out after curfew if there is a reason for it...

In the US I would like to point out that some municipalities have permenent curfews directed at teenagers.  For instance teens cannot congregate during certain hours at Arbor Place Mall in Douglasville, Georgia.  In another municipality there is a requirement that no teen be out after 10 pm on weeknights and no later than 12 am on weekends.  Is this a restriction on freedom? Clearly it is, but it is protected also due to the fact that it is reasonable.  So why cannot Honduras protect the safety of its population by establishing a curfew with limited exeptions?

Freedoms are freedoms as long as they do not impede other people's freedoms.  Throwing rocks and swinging sticks is not a permitted freedom because it endangers others.

As controversial as it might seem it is the right thing to prevent a civil war from breaking out because the general population is growing very tired of the violence by the Zelayaistas and the calls for violence from the embassy of Brazil by Zelaya....very recently individuals almost were able to reach the embassy and their intent was to remove Zelaya to bring him to Honduran soil to the authorities...and I am talking about the white shirted peaceful folks....

How smart does one have to be to understand this is reasonable?

No comments: