Robertson called for the assassination of Venezuela's president

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/3321225

Robertson's 'terrorist statements' slammed
Associated Press

CARACAS, Venezuela — Venezuela's vice president accused religious broadcaster Pat Robertson today of making "terrorist statements" by suggesting that American agents assassinate President Hugo Chavez.

Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel said Venezuela was studying its legal options, adding that how Washington responds to Robertson's comments would put its anti-terrorism policy to the test.

"The ball is in the U.S. court, after this criminal statement by a citizen of that country," Rangel told reporters. "It's huge hypocrisy to maintain this discourse against terrorism and at the same time, in the heart of that country, there are entirely terrorist statements like those."

The State Department distanced itself from Robertson's comments.

"We do not share his view, and his comments are inappropriate," spokesman Sean McCormack said.

There was no immediate comment from Chavez, who was winding up an official visit to Cuba today. Scores of journalists awaited Chavez at the airport, where he was to board a plane for a trip to Jamaica to discuss a Venezuela initiative to supply petroleum to Caribbean countries under favorable financial terms.

On Monday, Robertson said on the Christian Broadcast Network's "The 700 Club": "We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability."

"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."

Chavez has emerged as one of the most outspoken critics of President Bush, accusing the United States of conspiring to topple his government and possibly backing plots to assassinate him. U.S. officials have called the accusations ridiculous.

"You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it," Robertson said. "It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war ... and I don't think any oil shipments will stop."

Rangel called Robertson "a man who seems to have quite a bit of influence in that country," adding sarcastically that his words were "very Christian."

The comments "reveal that religious fundamentalism is one of the great problems facing humanity in these times," Rangel said.

Robertson's remarks appear likely to further stoke tensions between Washington and Caracas. Chavez has repeatedly claimed that American officials are plotting to oust or kill him — charges U.S. officials have denied.

The United States is the top buyer of Venezuelan crude, but Chavez has made it clear he wants to decrease the country's dependence on the U.S. market by finding other buyers.

Chavez has survived a brief 2002 coup, a devastating two-month strike that ended in early 2003 and recall referendum in 2004. The former army paratroop commander, a close ally of Cuban leader Fidel Castro, is up for re-election next year, and polls suggest he is the favorite.

 

Absolutely, credit where credit is due...I'm actually suprised they responded so quickly

 

i'm in love with your sig. i want to marry it.

 

Agreed. Credit where credit is due. They responded quickly and appropriately.

 

if there were no oil there i doubt anyone would give a flying rats 'a $ $'!

 

that was kind of what I was thinking

so what if he only has no oil or just a small pool of oil?

 

Well, in Realpolitik terms, Venezuela should be our next war target. Any sort of manufactured threat should do.

That's a lot of oil, and it's much easier to set up a client state there, than in Iraq. Plus, it's our hemisphere. Logistics are much more manageable.

May as well invade and replace the government in Mexico, too.

The problem is, setting up the client state isn't all that easy, as we're finding out. Sort of like the Romans found out with the Parthians.

 

My second Thadeus quote as a sig this month....does that mean-gasp-that I want to marry Thadeus?!

 

This is as weak a response as I've ever heard. True he's a private citizen, but how many private citizen's are as influential religiously and politically as Robertson. Rumsfeld or the President will never admonish this nut for anything he says or does. That wouldn't be prudent, as somone once said.

 

uh, how about this from the very same article

"We do not share his view, and his comments are inappropriate," spokesman Sean McCormack said.

 

how about this

Pat Robertson Remark Roils the Markets
by URI DOWBENKO

Did Pat Robertson make money by publicly calling for the murder of Hugo Chavez, president of Venezuela?

Political-economic analyst Al Martin says, "Pat's comments created a so-called 'flight to quality' bid in both the September long bonds and the Sep. dollar cntracts."

Martin, whose website Insider Intelligence.com specializes in market trading advisories, says that "Robertson sufficiently roiled the markets by creating a political rift. This was a problem which in turn created a 'flight to quality' in US assets because assets came out of Venezuela after he made those remarks on the 700 Club that Hugo Chavez should be killed."

"What's interesting to note," Martin continues, "is that a fund that Robertson is a large investor in, one of the deep offshore Smart Republicn Money trading pools, was a substantial purchaser of the Sep long bond and dollar contract indexes last night (Aug 22) just before he made those remarks."

"Of course it's impossible to tell how much money Pat Robertson would have made," says Martin in a recent interview, "but one could ask 'Did Robertson have a financial motive in making such a remark?'"

"People may remember how Oral Roberts and Jimmy Swaggart used to do this.

Oral Roberts got himself in hot water for it by saying that the management of a certain publicly traded company were sinful and ungodly and the stocks should be sold. Subsequently this led to an SEC investigation. It was discovereed that when Oral had said that God had told him the stocks should be sold that he had already shorted the stock the day before -- or bought put options.

"They're just using their flock to enrich themselves," is Al Martin's conclusion. "They're using their religion as another device of market shilling."

link

 

I would like to hear it from someone inside the WH, considering the relationship they have had with Robertson over the years.

 

what relationship?? because pat voted for him?? because he encouraged others to vote for him??

 

Here's a link to a CNN story that includes info about Robertson and 9/11

The relevant portions have been colored red. Falwell was the main culprit, but it was on Robertson's 700 Club, and Robertson went along with it.

Falwell apologizes to gays, feminists, lesbians
September 14, 2001 Posted: 2:55 AM EDT (0655 GMT)


LYNCHBURG, Virginia (CNN) -- The Rev. Jerry Falwell said late Thursday he did not mean to blame feminists, gays or lesbians for bringing on the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington this week, in remarks on a television program earlier in the day.

On the broadcast of the Christian television program "The 700 Club," Falwell made the following statement:

"I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen.'"

Falwell, pastor of the 22,000-member Thomas Road Baptist Church, viewed the attacks as God's judgment on America for "throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked."

But in a phone call to CNN, Falwell said that only the hijackers and terrorists were responsible for the deadly attacks.

"I do believe, as a theologian, based upon many Scriptures and particularly Proverbs 14:23, which says 'living by God's principles promotes a nation to greatness, violating those principles brings a nation to shame,'" he said.

Falwell said he believes the ACLU and other organizations "which have attempted to secularize America, have removed our nation from its relationship with Christ on which it was founded."

"I therefore believe that that created an environment which possibly has caused God to lift the veil of protection which has allowed no one to attack America on our soil since 1812," he said.

Pat Robertson, host of the 700 Club program, seemed to agree with Falwell's earlier statements in a prayer during the program.

"We have sinned against Almighty God, at the highest level of our government, we've stuck our finger in your eye," said Robertson. "The Supreme Court has insulted you over and over again, Lord. They've taken your Bible away from the schools. They've forbidden little children to pray. They've taken the knowledge of God as best they can, and organizations have come into court to take the knowledge of God out of the public square of America."

National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Executive Director Lorri L. Jean bristled at the idea that gays and lesbians had anything to do with the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon that may have left thousands dead, and demanded an apology from Falwell.

"The terrible tragedy that has befallen our nation, and indeed the entire global community, is the sad byproduct of fanaticism. It has its roots in the same fanaticism that enables people like Jerry Falwell to preach hate against those who do not think, live, or love in the exact same way he does," she said.

"The tragedies that have occurred this week did not occur because someone made God mad, as Mr. Falwell asserts. They occurred because of hate, pure and simple. It is time to move beyond a place of hate and to a place of healing. We hope that Mr. Falwell will apologize to the U.S. and world communities."

Falwell told CNN: "I would never blame any human being except the terrorists, and if I left that impression with gays or lesbians or anyone else, I apologize."

 

So Robertson issued a fatwa?

 

assassinate away!

 

Exactly. Last time I checked Roberston wasn't holding elected office in the US gov. or serving in an official US capacity.

The only reason to care is for the entertainment value.

 

I'm absolutely dumbfounded by these recent events. Does anyone look at this administration with a suspicious eye? I've read countless times about G.W. Bush's coddling of these fanatical right-wingers. I've read that his first election especially was greatly aided by the religious right. Does anyone remember 2000? Bush billed himself as someone that could "unite" this polarized country, but hasn't he polarized it further since he was elected? We are embroiled in a war that was started under false pretenses with no easy or quick exit. We have let our "representative" democracy pass the patriot act, which GIVES THE GOVERNMENT THE AUTHORITY TO DISCARD SOME OF OUR "unalienable" CIVIL RIGHTS!

I'm especially excited because I recently watched the moving two-day documentary "Inside 9/11" on the National Geographic Channel. BOTH G.W. Bush and Bill Clinton and their respective administrations missed the boat on OBL. The most annoying thing I saw dated back to Clinton's presidency and the absolute ZEALOTRY with which the right and the mass media went after Tricky Dick for his alleged "BJ" and the fact that he lied about it...

... but are there any media members calling Bush and Rumsfeld on the "inaccurate intelligence" that produced the WMD's that lead to the death of many Americans and Iraqi's? Where was G.W. Bush's "public apology" for such an oversight? How about all those "tree huggers" who didn't disagree with an invasion of Iraq, but questioned the lack of an exit strategy? Where are those people now? My (yes, that pronoun denotes ownership) liberals were voting for the f***ing patriot act!

Basically, I want to know, with a republican controlled congress, Bush in the white house, and the future of the Supreme Court looking decidedly religious, what happened to the system of CHECKS AND BALANCES? My first government teacher explained that this was the genius of our system. It controlled corruption by making every branch of the government accountable for its actions. But this administration can seemingly do whatever it wants with no consequences.

It's not the fault of the right, as I (and all of you) know that the left would do the same if put in the same position. I'll add to that the fact that I see none of my fellow Democrats speaking up, railing against this wannabe theocracy (ok, too harsh?). I'm asking all of those who disagree with the direction this country is heading in to rise up! Let your vote be counted, let your voice be heard. Help me, and all of us, to rally the apathetic youth in this country to become involved in their government. We are lucky as Americans in that we get to participate in the democracy of our country. Left AND right b**** about the corruption among lobbyists yet we both elect men who participate in such conflicts-of-interest.

WE, left and right.... we, Americans have a choice, have an opportunity to change which road we travel down as a country. Scream from your rooftops the importance of your children’s' education, the cost of prescription drugs for our elderly and poor, the inevitable dangers of ruining our environment.

They'll listen.... won't they?

 

I'll throw this log onto the fire I may have just started:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/latimests/2...iciansforchrist


BTW, I mean no disrespect to anyone here. I have come to believe that our forum is just that, ours. I trust the people that post here and believe most of us CC.netters are open minded and love educated debate, even if it conflicts with their own views. Thanks for letting me be a part of such a kick ass web community. Go Rox, Texans, Astros, and AMERICA!

 

U.S. Dodges Robertson Comments on Chavez
By ANNE GEARAN
WASHINGTON (AP) - There's an old Southern saying that you dance with the one that brung ya, but as the Bush administration found out this week, sometimes you don't want to dance too close. The administration quickly distanced itself Tuesday from the suggestion by religious broadcaster and Bush backer Pat Robertson that the United States assassinate a leftist Latin American head of state.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack called Robertson's remarks about Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez ``inappropriate,'' but stopped short of condemning them.
``This is not the policy of the United States government,'' McCormack said. ``We do not share his views.''
The Bush administration does share many of Robertson's views on other matters, such as stem cell research, and Robertson's largely conservative, evangelical audience overlaps with the core of Bush's political base.
About nine of 10 white evangelicals voted for Bush in the 2004 election - about as high as his support from any group of voters, according to exit polls. This group also supported Bush overwhelmingly in the 2000 election.
McCormack tiptoed around the question of whether the rest of the world might assume that Robertson speaks, if not directly for Bush, at least for a sizable share of the Republican Party.
``I would think that people around the world would take the comments for what they are,'' McCormack said. ``They're the expression of one citizen.''
Robertson, founder of the Christian Coalition and a candidate for the Republican nomination for president in 1988, supported Bush's re-election last year and said he believed Bush is blessed by God. Robertson also told viewers of his ``700 Club'' television program that God had told him Bush would win re-election in a ``blowout.''
Speaking on the same program Monday, Robertson said killing Chavez would be cheaper than starting a war to oust him. Getting rid of Chavez would stop Venezuela from becoming a ``launching pad for communist influence and Muslim extremism,'' Robertson said.
``We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability,'' Robertson said. ``We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator.''
A Robertson spokeswoman, Angell Watts, said he would not do interviews Tuesday and had no statement elaborating on his remarks.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the Pentagon isn't in the business of killing foreign leaders, but he also did not denounce Robertson or his remarks.
``He's a private citizen. Private citizens say all kinds of things all the time,'' Rumsfeld said.
Venezuela's ambassador to the U.S., Bernardo Alvarez, said of Robertson's remarks: ``We are concerned about the safety of the president.'' Alvarez said measures should be taken to guarantee Chavez's safety any time he visits the United States. The Venezuelan leader is expected to attend the special session of the U.N. General Assembly next month in New York.
Rumsfeld and other Bush administration officials have been linking Chavez with Cuban leader Fidel Castro as destabilizing troublemakers in teetering Latin American democracies. En route home from visits earlier this month to Paraguay and Peru, Rumsfeld told reporters, ``There certainly is evidence that both Cuba and Venezuela have been involved in the situation in Bolivia in unhelpful ways.''
The United States was believed in the past to have been involved in the 1963 assassination of South Vietnam President Ngo Dinh Diem and attempts to assassinate Castro.
President Gerald R. Ford put political assassination off-limits in an executive order in the mid-1970s.
Democrats called the Bush administration's response tepid, and said it lends credence to the notion that the White House doesn't want to offend some of its most loyal supporters.
``It seems they are shuffling their feet when they should be running away from what Pat Robertson said,'' Democratic political consultant Steve McMahon said. ``That this president, who projects himself as brave and bold, doesn't want to stand up to his own right wing is ironic.''
Chavez, who was democratically elected, routinely criticizes Bush and the United States. He calls Bush ``Mr. Danger'' while Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is ``the imperial lady.''
He has repeatedly accused the United States of backing a plan to assassinate him, which Rice and others have denied. Earlier this year he threatened to cut off oil exports to the United States if it supports any effort to overthrow him.
That is not an inconsequential threat when gas prices are brushing $3 a gallon. Venezuela exports 1.3 million barrels of oil a day to the United States - 8 percent of the total supply.
The United States has accused Chavez of behaving undemocratically, but Rice was careful not to call him any names during a Latin American trip this year.

U.S. Dodges Robertson Comments on Chavez

Sorry about the URL