No way. Robertson is a Xian preacher, who uses TV and radio to preach murder. OBL and others are muslim preachers, who use mosques and TV to preach murder. What's the difference? Why one standard (he can say what he wants) for Xians (I should say US Xians) and another for muslims (send them back in the ME, or even kill them all or transform their country in a prking lot)?GunsGodGlory said:Pat Robertson has a radio show on which he states his personal opinion. Muslim extremists high jack a religion and use it to preach murder. Muslims can either condemn this or admit that they practice a religion that lends itself well to terrorism.
Ticomaya said:Of course not. Do you?
Nonsense.
Now, I assume by "catholic extremist" you refer to Robertson? The first mistake in your thinking was to translate what he actually said to "calling for the US govt to kill" Chavez. This is what he actually said:You translate, "but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it" to calling on the US government to act and kill the man?
- "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."
Robertson shouldn't have said what he did, but it is ridiculous to try and compare what he said and its effect, to the calls for violence against western interests by terrorist leaders. Although it strikes me that that's certainly the kind of thing a terrorist sympathizer would do.
Yes, if the head of a state calls for the assasination of our President, I will see a problem.
No, it's not. And it is you who obviously doesn't "see it."
Of course, he has the right to say it. But condemnations should be issued for such hate speech.ShamMol said:^There is a difference between preaching assasination and what Cindy is doing. If Pat Robertson had said God told him we must stay in Iraq-hey, I am all for his right to say that. I do not think he has the right to say we should assasinate a world leader. If I said that of say, President Bush, I would be in prison.
All that being said...I guess he has the fundamental right to say it, even if we should never say that about world leaders.
Of course, he has the right to say it. But condemnations should be issued for such hate speech.ShamMol said:^There is a difference between preaching assasination and what Cindy is doing. If Pat Robertson had said God told him we must stay in Iraq-hey, I am all for his right to say that. I do not think he has the right to say we should assasinate a world leader. If I said that of say, President Bush, I would be in prison.
All that being said...I guess he has the fundamental right to say it, even if we should never say that about world leaders.
U.S. Senators Call Robertson's Incendiary Comments on Chavez Irresponsible
Aug. 23 (Bloomberg) '' U.S. Senators Norm Coleman and Mel Martinez called Robertson's statements ``irresponsible'' and ``incredibly stupid.''
`It was an incredibly stupid statement and has no reflection on reality,'' Coleman, the chairman of the Senate's Foreign Relations subcommittee on the western Hemisphere, told reporters while on a trip to Rio de Janeiro.
``This type of statement justifies the Venezuelan government's worry about preserving the life of its president,'' Rangel (Venezuelan Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel) said. ``President Bush said yesterday that his government rejects all forms of terrorism. The reaction of the U.S. to this presumably religious man will put to the test U.S. rhetoric.''
I'll pitch in $20 for a plane ticket.cnredd said:According to Tony Blair's push for legislation on "hate speech", Robertson would/could be arrested for what he said in the USA if he visited jolly 'ole England.:lol:
freethought6t9 said:I think perhaps the problem the left have with Pat Robertson is that he is a "Christian" on a "Christian" talk show advocating murder. He also blamed liberals and abortionists for 9/11 saying it was Gods punishment. Actually it was Ralph Reedbut it was followed by Robertson saying "I agree". He later distanced himself from the remarks saying he wasn't paying attention, but come on.
epr64 said:We see a lot of message from the right on this board asking the muslims to condemn the extremist preaches.
I would also like to see the right condemn a appeal to murder from a lunatic US Xian..
The full article is here.
One could hope that the site was just a Xian-bashing one, but the story is also on USA Today and other sites.
Disgusting, if you want my opinion.
Y
Batman said:I'm not a fan of Robertson. But this guy should know that even negative press (or what he thought would be by putting the spotlight on Chavez with intimidation) sometimes works to the advantage of the one you're trying to bring down.
Death Threat May Bolster Chavez's Popularity Before Election
But you don't hate him, right?KidRocks said:Serves him right, glad to hear it may backfire mightly on Pat Robertson. Now, the topping on the cake would be for Chavez to issue an assassination hit on Pat Robertson, that would be so rich!
Would actually be doing us all a great justice too!
No more than you love those that want all muslims nuked, or the washington post building bombed (or was that the NYT?).Ticomaya said:But you don't hate him, right?
epr64 said:No more than you love those that want all muslims nuked, or the washington post building bombed (or was that the NYT?).
Y
Definitely right.cnredd said:Judge Napolitano(FoxNews) just pulled something out which would be totally hysterical to see...
According to Tony Blair's push for legislation on "hate speech", Robertson would/could be arrested for what he said in the USA if he visited jolly 'ole England.:lol:
The list, which the Home Office says is "indicative rather than exhaustive", will cover any foreign-born national "writing, producing, publishing or distributing material, public speaking including preaching, running a website; or using a position of responsibility such as teacher, community or youth leader to express views which foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs; seek to provoke others to terrorist acts; foment other serious criminal activity or seek to provoke others to serious criminal acts; or foster hatred which might lead to inter-community violence in the UK."
The Bank of Scotland has confirmed it is reviewing its links with the US evangelist Pat Robertson after he said Scotland was "a dark country" overrun by homosexuals.
The bank has come under increasing pressure to sever its business ties with Mr Robertson. It plans to launch a telephone banking operation in the United States with Robertson Financial Services.
I say you're wrong, because I've said nothing about wanting all muslims nuked, nor do I want all muslims nuked, or the Grey Lady bombed.epr64 said:No more than you love those that want all muslims nuked, or the washington post building bombed (or was that the NYT?).
Y
Ticomaya said:I say you're wrong, because I've said nothing about wanting all muslims nuked, nor do I want all muslims nuked, or the Grey Lady bombed.
But KR thinks it would be swell if Robertson was killed. Sounds like hate to me.
epr64 said:We see a lot of message from the right on this board asking the muslims to condemn the extremist preaches.
I would also like to see the right condemn a appeal to murder from a lunatic US Xian..
Disgusting, if you want my opinion.
walrus said:I certainly have no problem condemning what Robertson said. He is quite free to say it, but it was not a terribly bright thing for a person in his position to say. What bothers me is this idea some have that Robertson somehow represents Christianity. To the best of my knowledge, Robertson is nothing more than a TV personality and a failed presidential candidate. He is not in any way a representative of Christianity, or even a particular segment of Christianity. I do not know many Chrisitians who take him (or those of his ilk, like Falwell) seriously. It is very intolerant and close-minded (two things that liberals fear being percieved as like Superman fears kryptonite) to stereotype members of a group based on what one idiot says.
For the record, I have absolutely no problem with assasination myself. As someone already pointed out, it's cheaper than war.
walrus said:I certainly have no problem condemning what Robertson said. He is quite free to say it, but it was not a terribly bright thing for a person in his position to say. What bothers me is this idea some have that Robertson somehow represents Christianity. To the best of my knowledge, Robertson is nothing more than a TV personality and a failed presidential candidate. He is not in any way a representative of Christianity, or even a particular segment of Christianity. I do not know many Chrisitians who take him (or those of his ilk, like Falwell) seriously. It is very intolerant and close-minded (two things that liberals fear being percieved as like Superman fears kryptonite) to stereotype members of a group based on what one idiot says.
For the record, I have absolutely no problem with assasination myself. As someone already pointed out, it's cheaper than war.
cnredd said:I agree...Personally, he is to be condemned to the highest order...But I don't think good 'ol Pat is the spokesman for all of Christianity or for the Republican Party.
Pat has probably(I don't watch him) said many good things that drift into the night unnoticed by the media, yet when he says something stupid, the media immediately equates him with the Republican Party and Christianity.
If someone needs to point out that "Yes, there are fruitcakes on both sides, and Pat is a good example of one on the right", I will agree.
But to use this as an example of the right's thinking is incredibly shallow.
jallman said:I definitely agree with you here Redd. If I may add one more thing concerning our muslim counterparts...See Pat Robertson...see Osama Bin Laden...see the correlation? Not all muslims are like Osama, and not all Christians are like Pat Robertson. Its just sad that the crazies like these two become the poster boys of the religion because of the inflammatory nature of what they say.
This may have been a bit off topic, but I thought it was worth bringing up.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?