Pat Robertson

[McCulloch]

Pat Robertson said, "If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him [democratically elected Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez] , I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war. And I don't think any oil shipments will stop."

Suppose there is an internationally known mullah in the United States, who has a TV show watched every week by millions of faithful Muslims. He is as fundamentalist in his faith as Pat Robertson is in his and equally extreme in his politics. One day this mullah puts out a call on his TV show for Prime Minister Tony Blair to be assassinated. I have little doubt that this person would be branded a terrorist or someone inciting terrorism and arrested. By the definitions laid out by the United States, Robertson is calling for an act of international terrorism.

Given the preacher's ties to Bush's christian supporters, should legal action be taken against Pat Robertson? The Venezuelan government said, "This public call to assassinate a head of state, considered a crime by all modern legislation, is prosecutable by its very nature. That is what the civilized would is expecting of the U.S. authorities." Are the Venezuelans right?

[juliod]

Robertson needs to further clarify his statement and repent.

I don't expect to hear more about it, and I don't expect it to effect his popularity among right-wing christians.

But you see many people promoting these abominations and claiming they are "good Christians."

Yes, I see many many people doing this, daily.

The good reason for seperation of church and state is not to silence Christians like liberals want to do,

No one is "silencing" him. What a whiney complaint. As if he didn't run a major TV program.

Notice, also, that I'm one of the few saying that Robertson didn't break the law. Unlike conservatives and theists, we atheist liberals insist on viewing all issues in the same light, and not changing our opinions with the situation.

DanZ

[AlAyeti]

"atheist liberal."

Constant change is what you are. Grasping abomination shouldn't be part and parcel but it now is.

Please use "correct wing" instead of "right wing."

It is also more accurate.

Robertson screwed up and needs to deal with his actions. But all of the ranting from the left is dishonesty. They never say a word about muslims that really do inflict death on people.

Atheist liberal is also redundant. Now.

[Cathar1950]

AlAyeti wrote:

Please use "correct wing" instead of "right wing."

It is also more accurate.

So the right wing would have us belive. Both parts of you statement are way off.

But all of the ranting from the left is dishonesty. They never say a word about muslims that really do inflict death on people.

Oh yes they do and the even are critical of Israel and the USA. we are not innocent.
All the ranting from thr left is dishonesty?
What kind of invalid over genralization is that?

Now, let's hold all of those Muslim's and abortionists and those sexual deviants to an equal judgment. And, if they repent . . .

I See your line of defence. He did something wrong but all those abortionist and muslims are wrong or worse.

[micatala]

Please use "correct wing" instead of "right wing."

It is also more accurate.

Not more accurate, just more arrogant.

Robertson screwed up and needs to deal with his actions. But all of the ranting from the left is dishonesty. They never say a word about muslims that really do inflict death on people.

It has been pointed out to you several times that this is a false statement, and yet you continue to make it. Do you have no regard at all for the truth? Do you have no conscience regarding actually attempting to see that what you write bears some faint resemblance to reality?



Here is an article by Vanessa Redgrave (probably a liberal in your view) written shortly after September 11th. She speaks against going to war in Afghanistan, but also speaks very clearly against the crimes committed on September 11th, and the justification we have for taking action.

Here is an editorial from the 'liberal' San Francisco Chronicle, outlining in no uncertain terms the causes for terrorism, including the increasing radicalization of segments of Islamic society. No sugar-coating or dodging the issue here.

As has been noted above, liberal organizations like Amnesty International (of which I am a member) have for years been speaking out against the atrocities and lack of human rights in many countries all across the world, including Muslim countries. I myself have written letters to Saudi Arabia and Indonesia.

A number of liberal Senators, including John Kerry, have been very vocal in their support for bringing terrorists, Muslim or not, to justice, and have voiced their opinions that President Bush is not doing enough or not taking the appropriate actions to combat terrorism.

The problem is, you have the erroneous idea that you and those who share your views are opposed because they are Christian. You don't seem to see that you are opposed because of the specifics of your views, and because of your lack of logic in supporting them. You seem to think that it is OK to attack or verbally bask Muslims, and that we should even be encouraged to do so. I don't see this as a behavior that Christ would encourage.

What in the world do you want liberals to say about Muslims who inflict death on others?

[juliod]

And here's a quote from George Galloway (Britian's current hate-object) in Parliment (given right after the London Bombings):

"When I was on the Labour Benches and spoke in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, I said that I despise Osama bin Laden. The difference is that I have always despised him. I did so when the Government, in this very House, gave him guns, money and encouragement, and set him to war in Afghanistan."

Here's a link (the whole speach is worth reading):

http://www.respectcoalition.com/?ite=821

And here's the relevant parts of his testomony to the US Senate, when he tore them a new hole:

"On the very first page of your document about me, you assert that I have had "many meetings" with Saddam Hussein. This is false.

I have had two meetings with Saddam Hussein, once in 1994 and once in August 2002. By no stretch of the English language can that be described as "many meetings" with Saddam Hussein.

As a matter of fact, I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as Donald Rumsfeld met him. The difference is that Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns and to give him maps the better to target those guns.

I met him to try and bring about an end to sanctions, suffering and war and, on the second of the two occasions, I met him to try and persuade him to let Dr Hans Blix and the United Nations weapons inspectors back into the country - a rather better use of two meetings with Saddam Hussein than your own Secretary of State for Defence made of his.

I was an opponent of Saddam Hussein when British and Americans governments and businessmen were selling him guns and gas. I used to demonstrate outside the Iraqi embassy when British and American officials were going in and doing commerce.

You will see from the official parliamentary record Hansard, from March 15 1990 onwards, voluminous evidence that I have a rather better record of opposition to Saddam Hussein than you do and than any other member of the British or American governments do."

Linky: http://www.respectcoalition.org/elect/news.php?ite=782

I'd vote for Galloway.

DanZ

[AlAyeti]

No there is no voice as loud against real horror meted out on Americans and Christians worldwide from the left. Why? because the left has a voice against decency that is its very foundation. Communism, Socialism, sexual deviance, sexualization of children, all are voices from the left. By complicity.

You cannot ask a rapist to "make better choices." You need to physically act aginst him (or her).

Robertosn was attacked wothout let up for "saying" something violent. Attacked and attacked and attacked from the media mill of leftist rants.

But never a consistent barrage about sexualizing children by Liberal ideology (Hollywood) or the true atrocities that need to be stopped by actions by Muslim believers against non-believers.

Flufy indignation of liberal two-faced cowards and agendaists does not stop horror but certainly allows it. There is real evil forces at work. If, the Bible is truth. The wolf is certainly hidden within the meek sheep. That looks more like a Liberal these days than anything else.

Where is the Leftist cry against the communist Chavez? What a joke that would be. The left is communist.

No American and certainly no Christiann can align themselves with the Left. It is anti-American and absolutely anti-Christian. By actions.

What if the "Good Samaritan" were to walk up on the guys that beat up the victim mentionned in the story? Would his voice of opposition do anything to stop thieves and robbers? Would psychologists do any good?

No.

Only actionns stop an evil person. If Robertson is judged for his statement as being evil for saying them, then let justice take its course. His humanitarian "company's" have fed millions and millions of people let us not forget in the Leftist smearing of the bad pat Robertson. Leftists either let people die by worthless b-tching or help Muslim's and Communists kill people worldwide and sexual deviants get the status of culture.

I am also a member of Amnesty International. What a joke that organization truly is! Christians are wholesale slaughtered in Muslim and communist countries but AI does little more than notice it and walk on.

Christians believe that there is evil in this world.

Leftist/Liberals dwell amongst it, and call it diversity. And the innocent really die.

Actions speak louder than words.

Talk is cheap for a reason. John Kerry, et al prove their worth by their mouths and their actions point to a totally sinister voice speaking through them.

There is no greater gift than to lay down your life for another. The left dishonors the actions of those willing to die for others while "talking with" their killers.

[MagusYanam]

Only actionns stop an evil person.

This is an un-Christian attitude, far more so than anything said so far on this topic. It was Martin Luther King, Jr. who told us 'hate cannot conquer hate, only love can'. It was Jesus who said to pray for those who persecute you, and to love your enemies. From the looks of things, the liberals are doing the better job of holding to Jesus' example.

because the left has a voice against decency that is its very foundation.

The wolf is certainly hidden within the meek sheep. That looks more like a Liberal these days than anything else.

The left is communist.

No American and certainly no Christiann can align themselves with the Left. It is anti-American and absolutely anti-Christian. By actions.

The left dishonors the actions of those willing to die for others while "talking with" their killers.

These words reek of a hatred so un-Christian, so indecent and so dishonourable it shames the faith. It blinds you to the good liberals do and scales out of proportion everything you find wrong in them. It blinds you to the good intentions and the Biblical importance (far more than fighting) of reasoning with those who do evil. There truly is a beam in your eye you can't see, but I can't pull it out for you - only you can, with God's help.

I pray for you. I control my anger on these posts and try to reason with you. It hasn't availed either of us yet, but I'm not giving up. I think that this way is far more productive and far more amenable to this forum than giving in to my anger.

[micatala]

No there is no voice as loud against real horror meted out on Americans and Christians worldwide from the left. Why? because the left has a voice against decency that is its very foundation. Communism, Socialism, sexual deviance, sexualization of children, all are voices from the left. By complicity.

I see. So several of us make a valid point and provide examples, and you go off on a tangential tirade that changes the subject and doesn't stay on topic.

You continue to make other unsubstantiated charges.

I am not really here to 'defend the left,' but I don't see that you have ANY basis for saying

the left has a voice against decency that is its very foundation

It seems that you are smearing a whole category of people with no justification, possibly based on a few isolated examples that you carry around in your own mind.

You cannot ask a rapist to "make better choices." You need to physically act aginst him (or her).

THis is absolutely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, as far as I can see.

Robertosn was attacked wothout let up for "saying" something violent. Attacked and attacked and attacked from the media mill of leftist rants.

You might look up the recent article by Kathleen Parker, a conservative columnist, who cites many other examples of Robertson sticking his foot in his mouth.

It isn't just the leftists that have trouble with what he said, Al. A lot of us, as Christians, just like to see Christians setting a good example by what they say and how they act. A lot of CHristians of both liberal and conservative persuasions do set good examples. Robertson unfortunately is not one of them, IMHO.

No American and certainly no Christiann can align themselves with the Left. It is anti-American and absolutely anti-Christian. By actions.

Same old false song, over and over. Magus and others have provided plenty examples of liberal Christians working for the good of others and the world at large. You simply refuse to acknowledge the plain truth.

Leftists either let people die by worthless b-tching or help Muslim's and Communists kill people worldwide and sexual deviants get the status of culture.

As was pointed out above, the Reagan administration helped Iraqi's kill Iranians for years in the 1980's. Was this a good Christian and conservative thing to do?



We helped Mujahadeen (many of whom could be described as radical Muslims) kill Russians. We helped the Shah of Iran run a brutal dictatorship in Iran for years. We implicitly helped Salvadoran death squads kill thousands of people, including Christian Nuns. We helped Pinochet oust a democratically elected ruler in Chile, helping to initiate his brutal dictatorship.

The dictators the U.S. has supported in the past have killed thousands of people, many of them CHristians, some of them just because they were 'liberal' and actually advocated for the poor and down-trodden of their societies. The left has consistently opposed these dictators, and the U.S. policies in support of these dictators.

I have been reading the biography of Morris Dees, a Jewish lawyer who has made a career of fighting legal battles against the KKK, and has received death threats as a result. Is he an anti-Christian liberal for fighting against an avowedly Christian and radically conservative and racist organization? Is he not putting other's lives before his own in his actions?

Your false characterizations are so laughably far removed from reality, it's ludicrous.

As you say, talk is cheap. At least liberals are willing to put themselves on the line to stand up for people's rights and basic safety, whether in Mississippi in 1963, El Salvador in 1983, or the Sudan in 2003.

If you would get over your whole liberal/leftist complex, you might see that political and religious ideology is not the most important distinction we can make between people. Both liberals and conservatives, both CHristians and Muslims, both people of faith and people of no faith, all over the world are working to make the world a better place.

[AlAyeti]

I act exactly as i say.

I do not promote condom use against AIDS. I promote morality. If others do not follow that perfect advice then so be it. They kill themselves.

Liberals do not take a moral stand of abstinence as perfect, because they think everyone is like they are. Shallow and unable to control their actions. Hollywodd leftists are the perfect example.

So they just talk. And by the actions they will not curb, lead others into death and horror. How many children are being raised by Murphy Brown's coast to coast???

Yet it was dan Quayle that was caled stupid. A potatoe is not a fatherless child.

The last thing you want me to do is to start listing ALL of the insanity the left has inflicted on our world as "diversity and choice." You're not stupid, just complicit. You won't see what I write anyway. That is clear. Anyway, you have a pat answer to relegate me to the bigoted.

Martin Luther King Jr. TOOK ACTIONS and lost his life trying to show and say to others to do the right thing. AND sitting in front of evil and trying to stop it is an action.

I see the same comments mentioned to me that were mentioned to him from the racists. I am just called a homphobe and bigot or Right-Winger or whatever. But any trip to downtown city streets shows anyone what is influencing our society and it is not Liberalism!

I, like King, am pointing out the wrong done by liars that claim they have "civil rights" to make laws. Liberals have now become the intolerant of anyone that dissents.

I present science to oppose the sexualization of children and am called a bigot or homophobe.

Do the math.

Or visit any downtownn city corners after dark. Or juvenile halls, or group homes or welfare recipient. Liberalism is their religion and it is not getting them to heaven.

Rant?

Those people have names.

[juliod]

No American and certainly no Christiann can align themselves with the Left. It is anti-American and absolutely anti-Christian.

Al,

Jesus was a hippie.

DanZ