john5746 Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 "If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it," Mr. Robertson said Monday on his show, "The 700 Club." "It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war. And I don't think any oil shipments will stop." Quote from Pat Robertson, a President wanna-be, Christian Coalition founder. Another insane remark to add to his long list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Just to show how outrageous his comments were, even the ultra-conservative Wall Street Journal's Opinion Journal web site criticized his remarks yesterday, basically calling him a nutcase, and wondering how he could be opposed to abortion on moral grounds, and yet in favor of assassination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Kirby Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Him who? Yes, Pat Robertson is insane. I just wish I had started the 700 club instead of him. Boy would things be different. How did he get away with saying that the State Department needed to be nuked a few months ago? What's so special about him, anyway? If I had said that I would be in jail without the option of bail waiting for my trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john5746 Posted August 24, 2005 Author Share Posted August 24, 2005 I was just wondering, should he be deported? I mean if an Islamic cleric in America said Blair should be taken out, people would be screaming to have him removed. Is terrorism acceptable if it is against enemies(real or perceived)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyrisch Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Is terrorism acceptable if it is against enemies(real or perceived)? The US was the enemy of the terrorist groups that organized and went through with the 9/11 attacks; were those attacks acceptable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Unlike the people in the World Trade Center on 9/11, Hugo Chavez is not a civilian nor an innocent bystander. The issue before us in this thread is whether assassinating a foreign official constitutes (a) terrorism, and (b) an acceptable measure. My personal opinion is "no" on both counts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alibabba Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 What would be the point of whacking this Chevez if we don't have someone lined up to take his place? And if we did, (have someone lined up to take his place) then why not just let HIM do it? (the linee,whack Chevez) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Unlike the people in the World Trade Center on 9/11, Hugo Chavez is not a civilian nor an innocent bystander. The issue before us in this thread is whether assassinating a foreign official constitutes (a) terrorism I would consider a government sanctioned assassination of another country's leader an act of war, not terrorism. Was Pearl Harbor an act of "terrorism"? Pat Robertson is a big douche who deserves to be ridiculed, but asking our government to kill someone is just stupid, but certainly not criminal nor terrorist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alibabba Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 I would consider a government sanctioned assassination of another country's leader an act of war' date=' not terrorism. Was Pearl Harbor an act of "terrorism"? Pat Robertson is a big douche who deserves to be ridiculed, but asking our government to kill someone is just stupid, but certainly not criminal nor terrorist.[/quote'] From what I heard him say, (Robertson) I didn't hear him ask anybody to do anything. All he said was "I think we should" do it. Hell, I thought we should have assassinated Saddam for 10 years before we invaded Iraq. The question is, if we had, would we have went to war in Iraq? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhDP Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 Quote from Pat Robertson, a President wanna-be, Christian Coalition founder. Another insane remark to add to his long list. He's like Ann Coulter and Jerry Falwell, you cannot take him seriously, but he's a very funny guy. My 2 favorites from Robertson; "The wars of extermination have given a lot of people trouble unless they know what was going on.The people in the land of Palestine was very wicked. They were given over idolatry; they sacrificed their childrend; they had all kinds of abominable sex pratices; they were having sex, apparently, with animals, they were having sex men with men, and women with women; they were committing adultery, fornication; they were worshipping idols, offering their children up; and they were forsaking God. God told the Israelites to kill them all - men, woman and children, to destroy them. And that seems to be a terrible thing to do. Is it ? Or isn't it ? Well, let us assume there were 2,000 of them. I don't have the exact number. Pick a number. God said, 'Kill them all.' Well, that would seem hard, wouldn't it ? That would be 10,000 who would probably go to Hell. But, if they stayed and reproduced, in 30 or 40 or 50 or 60 or 100 more years, they could conceivably be - 10,000 would go to a 100,000 - 100,000 could conceivably go to a million. And then, there would be a million people who would have to spend eternity in Hell ! And it's far more merciful to take away a few than to see in the future a 100 years down the road, and say, "Well, I have to take away a million people that would forever be apart from God, " because the abomination was there like a contagium, God saw that there was no cure for it. It wasn't going to chance; their hearts weren't going to chance; and all they would do is cause trouble for the Israelites, and pull the Israelites away from God, and prevent the truth of God from reaching the Earth. So, God, in love, took away a small number that he might not have to take away a large number." "The feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism, and become lesbians." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Kirby Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 And Mr. Robertson can't understand why so many people dismiss him as a loon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MetaFrizzics Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 All people who make more than $50,000 per year are insane greedy lunatics until proven otherwise. They are the real enemy of mankind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Kirby Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 All people who make more than $50,000 per year are insane greedy lunatics until proven otherwise. They are the real enemy of mankind. God, don't tempt me. What is tempting is the idea of performing in front of audiences for money, if they will eat up whatever I care to feed them and pay me to do it. Tom Gallagher, Pat Robertson, same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john5746 Posted August 24, 2005 Author Share Posted August 24, 2005 All people who make more than $50,000 per year are insane greedy lunatics until proven otherwise. They are the real enemy of mankind. You are the liberal version of Pat Robertson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 And Mr. Robertson can't understand why so many people dismiss him as a loon. All people who make more than $50,000 per year are insane greedy lunatics until proven otherwise. They are the real enemy of mankind. It's always been fascinating to me that extremists are iminently capable of recognizing other extremists, but never recognize it in themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MetaFrizzics Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 You are the liberal version of Pat Robertson. LOL!OMG I just need an aging liberal billionaire to fund my crazy, fun schemes... It's always been fascinating to me that extremists are iminently capable of recognizing other extremists, but never recognize it in themselves. [ bubble=bender (picture it)] Let me get out the full length mirror... Uh oh! We'll never get that on the album cover! [ / bubble ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Demosthenes- Posted August 24, 2005 Share Posted August 24, 2005 I would consider a government sanctioned assassination of another country's leader an act of war, not terrorism. Was Pearl Harbor an act of "terrorism"? Is an assasination of a leader equatable to the attack of a military base? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Posted August 25, 2005 Share Posted August 25, 2005 I'd say, take out Kim Jong-il first. Pat Robertson is probably saying exactly what the CIA is thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In My Memory Posted August 25, 2005 Share Posted August 25, 2005 MetaFrizzics, LOL!OMG I just need an aging liberal billionaire to fund my crazy' date=' fun schemes...[/quote'] Mr. Frizzics, George Soros is on hold for you on line 1. Mr. Frizzics, Soros on hold line 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MetaFrizzics Posted August 25, 2005 Share Posted August 25, 2005 MetaFrizzics' date=' Mr. Frizzics, George Soros is on hold for you on line 1. Mr. Frizzics, Soros on hold line 1.[/quote'] OMG someone who has a sense of humour on this board! I think I am in love! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevermore Posted August 25, 2005 Share Posted August 25, 2005 Nevermind, off topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglas Posted August 26, 2005 Share Posted August 26, 2005 Quote from Pat Robertson, a President wanna-be, Christian Coalition founder. Another insane[/color'] remark to add to his long list. I just heard on TV that in 1997, George Stephanopoulos suggested to Clinton that he have saddam hussein assassinated. Not sure if his remark was insane though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budullewraagh Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 since when did neo-cons like saddam hussein? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 What neo-cons? Did I miss something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skye Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 I think this is an interesting article: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050912/kim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now