WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Bush administration officials Tuesday dismissed Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson's call for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez as the remarks of a private citizen, but Venezuela accused Robertson of promoting terrorism. (C.N.N.com)
2006-09-21 07:22:11 · 17 answers · asked by pol_douglas 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I obviously don't know all the details thats why I was asking the question. BTW to say it's old news doesn't cut it. 9/11 was y5 years ago...it still seems like yesterday. Before you get all high horse ish, I'm not comparing the 2, I'm saying that the time frame has no bearing on the issue. Incidentally, to the person who made the...you don't see christians running around threatening to cut peoples heads offf if they don't convert...how do you think the Africa etc was converted? With flowers and cake. Again, the time scale is irrelevant, it happened. I'm just asking for an opinion.
2006-09-21 07:49:35 · update #1
Pat Robertsons "call for", but not carried out vs Radical Muslims "actualy doing".
2006-09-21 07:26:14 · answer #1 · answered by Will 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Edited version from my previous post. I am surprised that Pat Robertson would say such a thing given the climate of religous intolerance and terrorist action from religous leaders.
Pat was wrong to have called for this, however he has appologized, that really doesn't help. He has been putting his foot in his mouth a lot lately.
However I do agree that somebody should take Hugo's A@@ out! asap! along with a few other screwball leaders these days.
2006-09-21 14:25:35 · answer #2 · answered by battle-ax 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, the different is that Pat Robertson apologized and this actually occurred quite awhile back. His words were directed to one person, not the who public. You also do not see Christians marching around the world vowing to cut our heads off if we don't convert, and death to all infidels. So as you can see there is a major difference here.
2006-09-21 14:29:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm afraid that Pat Robertson, though a great spiritual leader at one time, has some mental issues going on and I think everyone knows this and takes his comments for what they are worth.
BIG difference!
2006-09-21 14:28:08 · answer #4 · answered by Buff 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Did you bother to listen to Pat Robertson's explanation? Most likely not. Just like they took a comment out of context from the Pope's dialog.
2006-09-21 14:26:02 · answer #5 · answered by Spirit Walker 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
WHAT? Pat Robertson went on record to say Chavez should be ASSASINATED for his negative REMARKS to Bush at the U.N.? Are we living in Nazi Germany that no one in the world can talk down to Da Feurher?
It is indeed an example of how certain Americans demonstrate how they can be as violent and inhuman in their thinking as some Muslims, but please, don't give Pat Robertson a gun and send him off to Venezuela or he'll make fools of all Americans.
2006-09-21 14:33:30 · answer #6 · answered by What I Say 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Pat Robertson did say that, but I haven't seen a wave of Christians trying to blow up Chavez. Of course the day is not over.
2006-09-21 14:31:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
This is old news.
The difference is that Hugo Chavez is not a private citizen, he is the president of a country.
And Pat Roberton is only a television broadcaster.
2006-09-21 14:25:36 · answer #8 · answered by knittingmom 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The main difference is that no one takes Pat Robertson seriously.
2006-09-21 14:25:12 · answer #9 · answered by Chredon 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Didn't this happen back in August !? Why should Bush have commented about this,the Bush Administration didn't make the comment.. What is your point.I don't believe any sitting President should have to apologize for every comment an American nut case makes. Have you read half the "Lets kill Bush " crap that's typed in this venue...
2006-09-21 14:32:48 · answer #10 · answered by bereal1 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋