How Pat Robertson raised millions on the back of a non-existent aid project (1 Viewer)

[Andalublue]

I've never been enamoured of televangelists, but this pretty much takes the biscuit. If you can find a scummier example of profiteering at the expense of the victims of genocide, I'll tip my hat to you.

Mission Congo: how Pat Robertson raised millions on the back of a non-existent aid project | Film | theguardian.com

 

[justabubba]

serves to confirm his credentials as a reich wing presidential candidate

 

[douglas]

Yeah, pretty much another gleaming gem from Pat Robertson, like; practicing karate might get you possessed by demons, prayer deflects hurricanes (which are god's punishment for abortions), and 9/11 was due to Pagans and the ACLU. Yup, good ol' Pat. Oh yeah, Pat, you're a F***ING NUTJOB!!!. But that's just my opinion, I guess.

 

[poweRob]

Don't forget how he was a huge supporter of Charles Taylor of Liberia... because he had gold mine contracts with him. Forget that Charles Taylor was slaying people left and right.

A Christian he is not.

 

[justabubba]

Pat Robertson threatens documentary team over film that says his Africa charity is a fraud | The Raw Story

now he is trying to intimidate them


ditto for youtube, trying to retract his statement about gays, AIDS and a ring to cut victims

 

[Montecresto]

Doesn't he have a diamond mine in Africa, too?

 

[Andalublue]

Doesn't he have a diamond mine in Africa, too?

That was the point of the investment in 'aid' flights. He used them to maintain supplies to his diamond mine in the south of the D.R. Congo.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

I've never been enamoured of televangelists, but this pretty much takes the biscuit. If you can find a scummier example of profiteering at the expense of the victims of genocide, I'll tip my hat to you.

Mission Congo: how Pat Robertson raised millions on the back of a non-existent aid project | Film | theguardian.com

Not that I would be exactly surprised if the accusations turned out true, but I'm highly skeptical of any such claims based on reporting from the guardian and a documentary film.

 

[Thrilla]

what an absolute ****wad.

 

[Andalublue]

Not that I would be exactly surprised if the accusations turned out true, but I'm highly skeptical of any such claims based on reporting from the guardian and a documentary film.

It's not a question of editorial comment but of evidence from people involved, i.e. former employees of Robertson's so-called charity organisation. I understand you might probably have a political aversion to The Guardian. What do you have against these particular film-makers, who have no connection to the Guardian Media Group, that leads you to doubt their professional ethics? Or indeed those of the interviewees?

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

It's not a question of editorial comment but of evidence from people involved, i.e. former employees of Robertson's so-called charity organisation. I understand you might probably have a political aversion to The Guardian.

My aversion to the Guardian is hardly political, but more based on shoddy reporting and agenda driven writing

What do you have against these particular film-makers, who have no connection to the Guardian Media Group, that leads you to doubt their professional ethics?

None, I just don't take claims from random people as fact.

 

[VanceMack]

I dont doubt anything about this. Im almost finished reading "Shake Hands with the Devil". There were no saints in Rwanda...or most of Africa.

 

[Andalublue]

My aversion to the Guardian ...is based on shoddy reporting and agenda driven writing

So it is political, then. Show me a media outlet that doesn't have an agenda that it follows. Does. Not. Exist. The fact is that what you're really saying is that you don't like the Guardian's.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

So it is political, then.

No, their politics are completely irrelevant. It's the manner in which they report information

Show me a media outlet that doesn't have an agenda that it follows.

If you want to pretend there is no question of degree here then it would be a waste of breath even having a discussion with you on the topic

The fact is that what you're really saying is that you don't like the Guardian's.

I've been reading the Guardian since Jello Biafra recommended it to me back in 98, and I really have no particular issue with their politics. What I take issue with is how they report the news.

 

[Andalublue]

No, their politics are completely irrelevant. It's the manner in which they report information





If you want to pretend there is no question of degree here then it would be a waste of breath even having a discussion with you on the topic




I've been reading the Guardian since Jello Biafra recommended it to me back in 98, and I really have no particular issue with their politics. What I take issue with is how they report the news.

Attacking the messenger is a fairly common and fallacious diversionary tactic. What's your take on Pat Robertson's so-called charity projects? Please try to remain on topic.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Attacking the messenger is a fairly common and fallacious diversionary tactic.

No, attacking the messenger is irrelevant and a fallacy when the content of that message has no dependence on the reporter. But if the reporter is making claims based on things such as their expertise or trustworthiness, then their expertise and trustworthiness clearly come into question.

Secondly, I made it rather clear that I have no issue with the story possibly being true. I'm just not going to accept it as true based on the reporting of the guardian and a documentary film

What's your take on Pat Robertson's so-called charity projects? Please try to remain on topic.

Everything I have posted here either dealt with the topic or issues you raised in response to my remarks on the topic.

 

[Andalublue]

Everything I have posted here either dealt with the topic or issues you raised in response to my remarks on the topic.

No, you haven't mentioned him, nor commented on anything relating specifically to the content of the OP.

 

[sangha]

No, attacking the messenger is irrelevant and a fallacy when the content of that message has no dependence on the reporter. But if the reporter is making claims based on things such as their expertise or trustworthiness, then their expertise and trustworthiness clearly come into question.

The reporter is not making claims based on their expertise or trustworthiness. They are reporting the facts uncovered by the documentarians.

This is not the first time PR has used charities to fund his own personal fortune

Pat Robertson controversies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[brothern]

I've never been enamoured of televangelists, but this pretty much takes the biscuit. If you can find a scummier example of profiteering at the expense of the victims of genocide, I'll tip my hat to you.

Not that I would be exactly surprised if the accusations turned out true, but I'm highly skeptical of any such claims based on reporting from the guardian and a documentary film.

Why is this news right now? Just the new documentary? ...

Pat Robertson's role in blood diamonds has already been established and has been beyond allegations for years at this point. I mean, this was first reported in 1999.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

No, you haven't mentioned him, nor commented on anything relating specifically to the content of the OP.

my first post: "Not that I would be exactly surprised if the accusations turned out true, but I'm highly skeptical of any such claims based on reporting from the guardian and a documentary film."

What we have discussed since has been in response to questions and arguments from you addressing the above

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

This is not the first time PR has used charities to fund his own personal fortune

from my first post "Not that I would be exactly surprised if the accusations turned out true"

The reporter is not making claims based on their expertise or trustworthiness. They are reporting the facts uncovered by the documentarians.

something being in a documentary does not validate it as the truth

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Why is this news right now? Just the new documentary? ...

Pat Robertson's role in blood diamonds has already been established and has been beyond allegations for years at this point. I mean, this was first reported in 1999.

I thought that involved gold?

Edit: I'm assuming you're talking about the Taylor connection out of Liberia?

 

[sangha]

from my first post "Not that I would be exactly surprised if the accusations turned out true"

From my first post: "This is not the first time PR has used charities to fund his own personal fortune"

something being in a documentary does not validate it as the truth

Something being in a documentary doesn't mean the Guardian reported it based on their own expertise or trustworthiness, as you falsely claimed

 

[brothern]

I thought that involved gold?

Edit: I'm assuming you're talking about the Taylor connection out of Liberia?

Oh no, the blood diamonds were with the 'Operation Blessing' nonprofit in the early 90s during the First Liberian War. Charles Taylor was involved to the extent that he had granted Robertson mineral rights.

The later affair was where Robertson was using the 700 Club and his political ties to oppose the ouster of President Taylor in 2003, while failing to disclose that he had significant investments in Liberian gold mines.

 

[mbig]

I've never been enamoured of televangelists, but this pretty much takes the biscuit. If you can find a scummier example of profiteering at the expense of the victims of genocide, I'll tip my hat to you.

Mission Congo: how Pat Robertson raised millions on the back of a non-existent aid project | Film | theGuardian.com

Not only Leftist Guardian, but the article was written by Staff Sleazeball and anti-Israel slander specialist Chris McGreal (Rot in hell McGreal)

Guardian Newspaper Apologizes,
Donates to Pat Robertson's Operation Blessing for Inaccurate Report on 'Mission Congo' Documentary
Nicola Menzie
Christian Post - December 13, 2013
http://www.christianpost.com/news/g...e-report-on-mission-congo-documentary-110715/

The Guardian newspaper has issued a clarification and apology for a September 2013 report on a documentary titled "Mission Congo" that revisited allegations of fraud against Pat Robertson. The British publication admits that its inaccurate report failed to cite that the allegations against Robertson and his Operation Blessing charity had been declared unsubstantiated years ago.

In the "Corrections and clarifications" page of its website, The Guardian notes:

An Apology: In an article entitled "Mission Congo: how Pat Robertson raised millions on the back of a non-existent aid project" we claimed that Pat Robertson ran an almost non-existent aid effort in Zaire, now the Democratic Republic of Congo. Operation Blessing actually sent six medical relief teams to Zaire, between July and December 1994, and arranged for 66,000lb of medicines and supplies to arrive in Goma on an aircraft it chartered from Amsterdam.

In addition, the article referred to a report by the Virginia Office of Consumer Affairs (OCA) without making clear that there was a further report by the Attorney General's Office (AGO) which found no evidence of wrongdoing by Operation Blessing or Pat Robertson and no evidence of intent to defraud. Operation Blessing has asked us to make clear that the report was signed off by four individuals at the AGO, none of whom received any donation from Pat Robertson or Operation Blessing. The article claimed a school and farm set up by Operation Blessing in Dumi had failed. We have been informed that the school is thriving and the farm remains operational to this day. We are happy to clarify the position and apologise to Operation Blessing. We have agreed to make a contribution to Operation Blessing to be used in its relief efforts for victims of the typhoon in the Philippines.​

The Retracted report, originally written by The Guardian's Chris McGreal, has been Removed from the publication's website, although some of its content remains on Internet forums and in full on the popular AlterNet.org website.

A statement from Robertson's representatives sent to The Christian Post Friday confirmed that The Guardian has indeed made a "substantial donation" toward Operation Blessing's relief efforts in the Philippines, which is recovering from the cataclysmic Typhoon Haiyan. The statement, apparently sent to several media outlets, called on publications to likewise review their coverage of "Mission Congo" and the "discredited allegations."

I have made a donation to highly rated O-B on the occasion of the publication of the above article. Not my first.