Thursday, August 25, 2005

Pat Robertson...

Fox News
Robertson Apologizes for Chavez Remark
Wednesday, August 24, 2005

VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. — Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson has issued an apology for calling for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
"Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement. I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him," Robertson's statement said.

"There are many who disagree with my comments, and I respect their opinions. There are others who think that stopping a dictator is the appropriate course of action," he said. "In any event, the incredible publicity surrounding my remarks has focused our government's attention on a growing problem which has been largely ignored."

Robertson explains in the statement the context of the comment and the reasons why he believes Chavez is a dangerous leader saying that he seeks to overthrow democracies, "found common cause with terrorists," and calls Fidel Castro and Saddam Hussein "comrades."

The televangelist had previously said Wednesday that his comments were "misinterpreted."
"I didn't say 'assassination,'" Robertson clarified during a broadcast of his "The 700 Club" Wednesday morning. "I said our special forces should go 'take him out,' and 'take him out' could be a number of things, including kidnapping."

"There are a number of ways to take out a dictator from power besides killing him," Robertson said. "I was misinterpreted by the AP, but that happens all the time."
However, during the original "700 Club" broadcast Monday night, Robertson clearly mentioned assassination.

"You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we are trying to assassinate him, we should go ahead and do it," Robertson said Monday. "It's a whole lot easier than starting a war, and I don't think any oil shipments will stop."
Unless American agents acted decisively, the evangelist argued Monday, Venezuela would become "a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism."
"We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator," he continued. "It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with."
But Jackson disagrees that pre-emptive measures are a good course of action. "We made a big mistake [in Iraq], we should not make that mistake again," he told FOX News. "Chavez was elected democratically. Here's a chance to build some bridges. We should not drive them into isolation."
Robertson's comments, picked up by the AP, quickly became Tuesday's major news story and drew reactions from liberal groups, the government of Venezuela, Jackson, and even the State Department and Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld.

Rumsfeld said he knew of no consideration ever being given to the idea of assassinating Chavez.
"Our department doesn't do that kind of thing. It's against the law," he said.

In Caracas, Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel said Venezuela was considering legal action against Robertson.
"There is a legal measure in the United States that condemns and punishes statements of this nature," Rangel said, referring to laws dealing with television broadcasts.

Chavez, elected president of Venezuela in 1998, has irritated U.S. officials with his fiery rhetoric against American "imperialism" and his increasingly close ties to U.S. enemies such as Cuba and Iran. He says he is leading Venezuela toward socialism.

In 2000, elections solidified his control over the new national legislature and he was re-elected president. Later that year, he passed a law enabling him to rule by decree for a period of one year, which allowed him to basically write his own laws.

Venezuela's middle and upper classes, as well as its business community and large labor unions, largely oppose Chavez and have accused him of trying to create a Cuban-style Communist dictatorship. But he enjoys overwhelming support among the country's poor.
Chavez has accused Washington of backing a short-lived 2002 coup against him, a charge U.S. officials have denied.

In 2004, a popular referendum over whether to recall Chavez — a provision he wrote into his new constitution — resulted in nearly 60 percent of voters urging him to stay in office.
Chavez has made anti-Americanism a central part of his foreign policy, going so far as to call George W. Bush a "pendejo" (a--hole). Earlier this year, he said the United States had plans to assassinate him.

He is a strong supporter of Castro, whom he considers a close friend, visited Saddam Hussein in Iraq in 2000 and has reached out to Iran and China.

Neighboring Colombia has accused Venezuela of giving shelter to left-wing Colombian guerrilla groups, and there have been allegations of Venezuelan influence in unrest in Bolivia earlier this year.

- Well, of course we all need to stand up for our beliefs and many leading republicans need to step out more than they are; but I don't think this was the time and way it should have been done. Come on, Mr. Robertson; please consider your words before you proclaim them on TV...

No, I don't think it was a smart move.

Jennifer

13 comments:

Matt said...

Pat Robertson's waffling on the assasination issue is quite pathetic and hurts his cause more than it helps.

Instead of making excuses for his statement, he should have either unequivocally stood by his statement or else issued a real apology.

As for the idea of assasinating problematic dictators, I'm all for it.

The Patriot said...

Even though it was not such a wise thing for him to all of a sudden just blurt out something so strong, I am still enraged by the accusations which the mainstream media has pointed at him; many things of which they themselves are guilty of. So he made a mistake; big deal, LIBERALS DO IT ALL THE TIME.

(sorry, didn't make this point strong enough in my post; it wasn't a smart move, but come on, a liberal has proclaimed things ten times as strong and who pays attention to that?)

Anonymous said...

Answer me this - is it a "Christian thing to do" to assassinate a man?

The leader of a foreign nation?

Isnt' there a commandment "Thou shall not kill?"

he made a mistake?!?! Do you, as a Christian ever even think about murdering another person?

As a Christian myself, I have lost all respect for Pat Robertson. And there is no excuse for him to say such things when he is supposed to be a leader.

The Patriot said...

You know, you remind me of what my dad just brought up at the dinner table tonight. He got upset because many Christians do not take action or live out what they preach. Yes, actually; if someone is threatening the lives of many, if he has evil intents, then I think it is perfectly rational to take him out. It can be the "Christian" thing to do if we read God's word and feel that it is something He would have us do; if it means protecting our families, rights and most importantly, God's Word, than we most definitely need to take a stand. Faith without action is not faith; faith means we trust God even in things that seem risky or maybe even questionable.

Me personally, no I haven't ever thought of "murdering" someone. Have you? I wouldn't call taking out someone who is a threat to our safety "murdering".

There is a time when it is right to kill. God commanded Moses and many other Christian leaders to proclaim death, kill and take over those with evil intentions. It is better for us to conquer over our enemies than to let them conquer over us; we must defend our freedom and religion.

You are echoing the mainstream media when you speak so strongly against Pat Robertson. Try to think outside of all they are saying about him. Yes, what he said wasn't very smart for his religious position, but was it really that bad that you need to convict him? Maybe as a Christian you have different views on speaking out in faith and expressing our opinions. If Pat Robertson thinks that someone is a threat to our safety, then heck, like any loose tongued liberal he sure has the freedom to say so. It may not come out so well coming from an evangelist such as himself, but I could have easily said the same thing.

Oh, and I most definitely admire a leader who will SPEAK OUT; something so many "Christians" are not willing to do.

Matt said...

Anonymous just committed one of the errors that ticks me off the most.

(S)he quoted the commandment as "thou shall not kill."

This is a completely wrong! While it is a common mistake that it is made in several major translations the actual Hebrew reads "Thou shalt not MURDER." Murder and killing are not necessarily the same.

Anonymous said...

He said "assassinate" - not take him out. And you should really stop and think before you support someone simply because he calls himself a Christian. The problem in this country is that too many Christians are advocating and supporting violent acts.

Thou shall not murder. Fine. Assassinate is murder.

The Patriot said...

When someone says they are a Christian, that makes no difference to me. Of course I'm going to have to witness their character which will show whether or not they are truly God's child. In this case with Pat Robertson I made no mention on how his Christianity effected my view towards his character; I simply said that I believe assassination, or "taking out", however you care to put it, can be the righteous answer to fighting against evil. Violent acts? You're thinking of the liberals; people like Cindy Sheehan; they like to take violent and irrational action. No, there are too many American Christians too afraid to step outside their homes to take the necessary, and often painful action that MUST be taken to protect our freedom.

Frazzledsister said...

Anonymous- I'm just asking, so don't get your gander up- Can tell us some of the violent acts that supposed Christians are supporting? Boy, I wish we had assassinated Saddam Hussien. Now he's just sitting in a nice cell enjoying himself.

Anonymous said...

the killing of civilians in Iraq....assassination of a foreign dictator....

And for you to allege Cindy Sheehan is somehow taking violent acts really just shows how closed minded and naive and blind you really are. i guess that's what happened when your parents fail to expose you to the real world.

The Patriot said...

You wouldn't happen to be that annoying anonymous that commented a couple months ago would you? Because if you are I don't think continuing this conversation is necessary. I love to debate on such things but have a strange feeling that no one would listen and that you would bring up too many things for me to comment on. And I don't like to converse with people that call me naive and blind; I'd much rather stick with the facts and not be pounded down simply because I expressed my views.

Thanks for commenting anyway.

Frazzledsister said...

"the killing of civilians in Iraq" - that wasn't us, that was Saddam Hussien. I understand, it's easy to get confused, so I forgive you. Just check your facts next time. "assassination of a foreign dictator"- Who? I don't remember that. Surely it would have been on the news if it had happened. Oh, and dictators are bad guys, so who's really upset about them dying anyway?

"And for you to allege Cindy Sheehan is somehow taking violent acts" Ok, I didn't say that. You really need to check your facts! "really just shows how closed minded and naive and blind you really are. i guess that's what happened when your parents fail to expose you to the real world." I am so sick of hearing that. Why does being home schooled automatically make a person totally ignorant of the world around them? That is true discrimination. You have no right to say that. You know nothing of our lifestyle or our parents. Shut up. I am going to go be sick.

Anonymous said...

Talk to any soldier who's come home from Iraq. Ask them how many innocent civilians get killed in iraq every single day. Here's a book i'd recommend to you:

John Crawford - The Last True Story I'll Ever Tell

he just got back from iraq.

Frazzledsister said...

I would LOVE to talk to any of the soldiers coming home from Iraq. I KNOW that innocent civilians are being killed in Iraq. That is why we are STAYING in Iraq- to kill or capture the murderers of these innocent people. You are not responding to any of my questions. Do you have any decent defense for the issues you have brought up?