The Supreme Court of Honduras acted acording their Constitution.

Now, independent countries have to ask permission to the United States first, in order to apply their own law?
Have you even bother to read Honduras Constitution? Please read the articles 4, 205 num 15, 239, 319 num 2, 373 and 374.

(you can download the Constitution at http://www.honduras.net/honduras_constitution.html

To define a Coup D´Etat, first, you have to define if the method used to remove the President from his position was contemplated in the National Constitution or not.

I think is utterly embarrasing that an U.S. Senator didn´t have a legal team to study this case before make any statement.

In the case of Honduras, almost the entire planet was wrong, because they analized the facts from the optic of "what this appears" instead of judging the facts with the Honduras Law .

I, in a very respecfully way, say to you THAT YOU WERE WRONG.

You confused THE WAY THAT IS WAS REMOVED FROM THE PRESIDENCY WITH THE WAY THAT HE WAS REMOVED FROM HIS HOUSE AND THE COUNTRY.

In Honduras, The Constitution clearly establish a procedure to remove the President. This procedure is basically an Accusation from the Congress and a Resolution from The Supreme Court to decide the matter. (See article 319, number 2, Honduras Constitution)

Neither the United States or ANY COUNTRY has any right to study Supreme Court Resolutions of an Sovereing and Independent Country.

The Resolutions made under their autority is something that all countries MUST RESPECT.

One thing is the way of how Zelaya was REMOVED AS A PRESIDENT, that was entirelly legal (By a Supreme Court Resolution after a Congress Accusation), and another thing is the way that he was removed from his house and country, which was ILLEGAL !!!

The main point here is that the legal process that ends with the removal of Zelaya was in fact LEGAL !!..

And the illegality of the enforcement doesn´t create a nullity of the legal procedure itself !!

The soldiers entered in Zelaya´s House AFTER HE WAS REMOVED !!

In Latin America it is common that the President could be remove by a Political Trial, when the Constitucion establish this particular procedure. But if we remove a President by a Political Trial and then we use the army to send him out of the Country, the Political Trial remains legal, regardless of if the execution was correct or not.

Obviouly, it is not popular of "politically correct" to support this because more than half of Latin America is under Chavez influence and you don´t want to drop more fuel into the fire.

But the Right thing always remains RIGHT, and wrong actions ALWAYS REMAIN WRONG.