TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Pat Robertson calls for assassination of Venezuelan president
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

Scum sticking up for scum.

Robertson has in the past defended Charles Taylor, a leader who is accused of 17 counts of war crimes and crimes against hummanity including but not limited to, "killings, mutilations, rape and other forms of sexual violence, sexual slavery, the recruitment and use of child soldiers, abduction, and the use of forced labor by Sierra Leonean armed opposition groups.(HRW)"

Emphasis is my own because I love irony:

http://www.ctlibrary.com/10625

quote:

Weblog: Pat Robertson Alone in Support of Liberian President "Laos frees Minnesota pastor, Baylor's faculty split on school's Christian direction, and other stories from online sources around the world" Ted Olsen Robertson continues to defend Liberian dictator, but other evangelicals are critical Liberian President Charles Taylor does not have many friends. And for good reason. The dictator has been indicted by a U.N.-related court for crimes against humanity, has fomented armed rebellion across West Africa, and has been accused of rape, mass murder, using child soldiers, and other atrocities in his days as a militia leader. During President Bush's trip to Africa, this week, Liberia has been a top priority. He and other officials have repeatedly called for Taylor's resignation. "Until Charles Taylor is out of politics, there isn't going to be any stabilization of the situation in Liberia," National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said last week. "Charles Taylor needs to leave because Charles Taylor is the problem. And Charles Taylor is, by the way, not just a problem for Liberia. � [He] has been a source of insurrection and insurgency in surrounding countries. And the efforts to make stable places like Sierre Leone, in which the British are involved, are extremely important to the stability of West Africa. So Charles Taylor is a problem on a number of fronts." In fact, the U.S. is sending a military team to Liberia to support several West African nations' efforts to bring peace there. More U.S. forces may be sent later, but has promised not to "overextend our troops." All of this is widely supported by American Christians, with one notable exception: broadcaster Pat Robertson. "We're undermining a Christian, Baptist president to bring in Muslim rebels to take over the country," he said on his 700 Club show Monday. "And how dare the president of the United States say to the duly elected president of another country, 'You've got to step down." In today's Washington Post, religion reporter Alan Cooperman looks at Robertson's most recent demonstrations of support for the dictator and his assertions that the country's "horrible bloodbath" is the result of the State Department's opposition to Taylor. "What Robertson has not discussed in these broadcasts is his financial interest in Liberia," Cooperman writes, noting a four-year-old, $8 million agreement between Robertson and Taylor to mine gold in the country. There's a good bet that Cooperman's colleague at the Post, columnist Colbert I. King, had some input on this matter. Back in 2001, King wrote a series of columns exposing and criticizing the mining operation, called Freedom Gold. In an interview yesterday, Robertson told Cooperman that Freedom Gold was intended to fund humanitarian and evangelical efforts in the country, such as a February 2002 Liberia for Jesus rally, where Taylor reportedly told 65,000 of his subjects, "I am not your president. Jesus is!" "There are people who say that's phony baloney, but I thought it was sincere," Robertson told Cooperman. "He definitely has Christian sentiments, although you hear of all these rumors that he's done this or done that. "I have never met Taylor in my life. I don't know what he has done or hasn't done. I do know he was elected by the people, and he has maintained a relatively stable government in Liberia; and they observe the rule of law; they have a working legislature; they have courts. And though he may have certain dictatorial powers, so do most leaders in Africa." But what's phony baloney, says Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, is Robertson's support of Taylor. "I would say that Pat Robertson is way out on his own, in a leaking life raft, on this one," he said. There are several unanswered questions in this. Is Robertson shaping conservative Christian opinion on Liberia? Have conservative Christians even given much thought to what's happening in the country? Might evangelical leaders like Land, who truly care about international human rights, be proactive in countering Robertson's comments? Might this controversy demonstrate that Robertson is "way out on his own, in a leaking life raft," in another way, that is, that he's seen as a spokesman for the evangelical movement only by those outside the movement?

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSZ Well you can look at it also from ABC's point of view (as a liability issue to them). Did you feel it was wrong of MSNBC to take Michael Savage's show off the air, when he told one of his callers to, "Choke on a sausage, get aids and die?"

I dunno, I could care less. I believe if enough people don't want to watch it, it'll go off air. And obviously, Michael Savage's show didn't have high ratings... otherwise it would be off air.

I find lies such as Dan Rather's much worse than stupid opinion.

Similarly I was against ABC's decission to pull Bill Maher's show "Politically Incorrect" off the air post-Sept 11th because he called the terrorist-hijackers "not-cowards". Of course this too was partly motivated by his poor ratings.


I believe people have a right to free speech and I believe that people have a right to be stupid. And I believe that if people and to listen and watch these people, they also have a right to do that. Similarly a network has its own rights to free speech and to who it allows on.. I just find it hypocritic that someone calls for Pat Robertson to go off air because he wanted Chavez to no longer be president of Venezula, yet when anyone calls Bush a murdered/theif/liar etc, equally radical in my opinion... no one quips.

Re: Scum sticking up for scum.

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSZ Emphasis is my own because I love irony: http://www.ctlibrary.com/10625

Right, I'd actually be ironic if Chavez was actually elected in a free and fair way...

Re: Re: Scum sticking up for scum.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Right, I'd actually be ironic if Chavez was actually elected in a free and fair way...

Are you fucking stupid or something? Chavez was elected in a democratic manner. Bush in the US is a good example of someone getting elected in a undemocratic manner. Also chavez still has greater support in his nation than bush does.
At the end of the day chavez is trying to help poor people in his nation and is trying to do some good in this world. It is alot more than many other world leaders can say.

swilly

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew Well, the bible states things like: "Be kind to your enemies. Do good to those who hate you." - Exodus 23:4-5 "Don't hate people." - Leviticus 19:17 "Love your enemies." - Matthew 5:44 "Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely." - Luke 3:14 "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged" - Luke 6:37 "See that none render evil for evil unto any man; but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves, and to all men." - 1 Thessalonians 5:15 "having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous: Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing;" - 1 Peter 3:8-9

I want to know where in the Bible it spoke of the Apostles killing folk.

It has to be in there somewhere right?

Where are those Bible thumpers when you need them?

There's a method to my madness.

When someone can answer I will explain why I asked what I asked.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Similarly I was against ABC's decission to pull Bill Maher's show "Politically Incorrect" off the air post-Sept 11th because he called the terrorist-hijackers "not-cowards". Of course this too was partly motivated by his poor ratings.

To the best of my knowledge, Bill Maher's comments were not a crime under US federal law, though they may have, like Robertson's, been a crime against the laws of common sense governing liability issues in broadcasting; thus his dismissal.

The same cannot be said for Robertson's comments.


http://writ.news.fi, ndlaw.com/scri...n/20050826.html

quote:

Was Pat Robertson's Call For Assassination Of A Foreign Leader A Crime? Had He Been a Democrat, He'd Probably Be Hiring A Criminal Attorney By JOHN W. DEAN snip- The Federal Threat Statute: Fines and Prison For Threats to Kidnap or Injure It is a federal felony to use instruments of interstate or foreign commerce to threaten other people. The statute is clear, and simple. Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 875(c), states: "Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both." (Emphases added.) The interstate or foreign commerce element is plainly satisfied by Robertson's statements. Robertson's 700 Club is listed as broadcasting in thirty-nine states and the District of Columbia, not to mention ABC Family Channel satellites which cover not only the United States but several foreign countries as well. In addition, the program was sent around the world via the Internet. But did Robertson's communication "contain" a "threat" to "kidnap" or "injure" Chavez? First, Robertson said he wanted to assassinate President Chavez. His threat to "take him out," especially when combined with the explanation that this would be cheaper than war, was clearly a threat to kill. Then, Robertson said he was only talking about kidnapping Chavez. Under the federal statute, a threat to "kidnap" is expressly covered. As simple and clear as this statute may be, the federal circuit courts have been divided when reading it. But the conservative Fourth Circuit, where Robertson made his statement, is rather clear on its reading of the law. cont-

Venezuela is now considering legal action against Robertson under this statute as well as international law:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005...ain798843.shtml

quote:

(CBS/AP) President Hugo Chavez said Sunday that his government may ask the United States to extradite U.S. religious broadcaster Pat Robertson to Venezuela for suggesting American agents should kill him.

As much as it's nice having radical Islamic clerics who espouse (as well as participate in) hate and violence behind bars, to have one of the leaders of the American Taliban behind bars would also greatly serve the interests of the world community.

I thought this was interesting and that this should change your opinion on Hugo Chavez.

quote:

Venezuela offers fuel, food to hurricane-hit US Mon Aug 29, 7:56 PM ET CARACAS (AFP) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez offered to send food and fuel to the United States after the powerful Hurricane Katrina pummeled the US south, ravaging US crude production. The leftist leader, a frequent critic of the United States and a target himself of US disapproval, said Venezuela could send aid workers with drinking water, food and fuel to US communities hit by the hurricane. "We place at the disposition of the people of the United States in the event of shortages -- we have drinking water, food, we can provide fuel," Chavez told reporters. Chavez said fuel could be sent to the United States via a Citgo refinery that has not been affected by the hurricane. Citgo is owned by Venezuela's state-owned oil company, Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA). In the Gulf of Mexico, which accounts for a quarter of total US oil output, 92 percent of crude and 83 percent of natural gas production were shut down due to Hurricane Katrina, which slammed Louisiana and Mississippi, according to US government data. Venezuela is the fourth-largest provider of oil to the United States, supplying some 1.5 million barrels a day. Last week, Chavez offered discount gasoline to poor Americans suffering from high oil prices and on Sunday offered free eye surgery for Americans without access to health care.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.