Is Pat Robertson calling for a murder, or is he insane?

Thanks for that.

Regards to you out there in your beautiful state,
BiR

 

Thanks, and regards to you as well back in the Old Dominion!

 

So, because we are all sinners, does that mean that it it alright to commit murder? </font>[/QUOTE]No, Terry.
Only that I wonder what the fuss is all about, why everybody seems to be making a big case of it.
Remember Paul's word ?
"I am what I am by the grace of God".
Remember Jesus' question to the crowd ?
"He who has not sinned, cast the first stone".

Pat Robertson's ability to say 'shocking', 'un-Christian' things like that in the heat of his discussion of non-Christian issues shouldn't surprise us who unlike the heathen understand what the Bible says about man.

I am not shocked anymore than I am about this pastor at Fountain of Life, Sebring, Florida who murdered two senior citizens who were his members.

I am not shocked anymore than I am if I hear a Sunday School teacher just molested his young charge.

I will not be shocked if I, like David, commit murder and/or adultery, or if I hear of anyone in this board who commits any kind of sin.

We do not possess ONLY a new nature.
Rather we posses BOTH old and new nature, and whoever gets fed well is stronger.

I'd pray for Robertson, or for the pastor who murdered his church members, as well as for the church members.

I think that is the Christian thing to do, instead of trying to determine if Robertson has a murderous bent, or insane.

 

Some more insanity concerning another dangerous leader in case you think Robertson is the first one to call for the assasination of an idiot.


"Conventional Wisdom," Newsweek, Nov. 17: "Take him down." (next to a photo of Hussein and a downward-plunging arrow)

Thomas Friedman, foreign affairs columnist, New York Times, Nov. 6: "Saddam Hussein is the reason God created cruise missiles. ...So if and when Saddam pushes beyond the brink, and we get that one good shot, let's make sure it's a head shot."

George Stephanopolous, former Clintonite and current ABC News analyst, on ABC'S "This Week," Nov. 9: "This is probably one of those rare cases where assassination is the more moral course...we should kill him."

Sam Donaldson, co-host of "This Week," Nov. 9: We should kill Saddam "under cover of law.... We can do business with his successor."

Bill Kristol, ABC News analyst, "This Week," Nov. 9: "It sounds good to me."

Cokie Roberts, co-host of "This Week," Nov. 9: "Well, now that we've come out for murder on this broadcast, let us move on to fast-track..."

Jonathan Alter, Newsweek, Nov. 17: "It won't be easy to take him out. ...But we need to try, because the only language Saddam has ever understood is force."

Newsweek, Dec. 1: "Why We Should Kill Saddam."

 

Was it a sin for David to Hit Goliath with a slingshot and a rock?

 

Goliath invited David to fight for a purpose; in effect, an early Jewish version of a duel, with each person representing their whole army. Goliath said "Choose a man from among you to come fight me. If he can kill me the Philistines will be your servants. If I kill him all of you will become servants of the Philistines."

This is completely different Pat Robertson's suggestion that someone foreign leader simply be offed because they're a thorn in our side. Now, if the Venezuelan leader invites the US to fight him, and agrees to give us his terrority if we win, then maybe Pat Robertsom might have a leg to stand on.

 

Pat Robertson, as other aging religious leaders engaged in politics, lets too much coffee room talk get out of the coffee room. This is the kind of thing we talk about over coffee and donughts, and I would dare say most Americans have conversations this controversial on a regular basis. That does not dismiss the fact that he said something stupid on T.V., but let's not be so hypocritical that we deny we have the same kinds of opinions and express them freely.

Cheers, Bluefalcon

 

Right on the money, Bluefalcon.

 

I can honestly say that I have never discussed killing someone in the coffee room.

That is fine, and he certainly has the right to his opinion. The hilarity of this is:
1. He actually said this on his show.

2. He then tried to claim that he was taken out of context.

3. He is now apologizing for the whole thing.

Source

Regards to you,
BiR

 

Pat Robertson is a kook. And his effort to distance himself from his own comment shows him to be dishonest, IMO.

 

My comment wasn't rash, and no I won't reconsider it. Sorry to hear about your wife. </font>[/QUOTE]Aaron, take a hike. And take your misogynistic attitude with you

 

A great deal of Tom Clancy-like movies are made of this sort of stuff. Haven't you ever heard of Treadstone and Jason Bourne? Just kidding........but if one thinks our American government doesn't engage in designed insurgencies to replace unwanted regimes, he's got his head in the ground.

As to Pat Robertson's comment, IF Venezuela's president-dictator is as bad as Robertson thinks he is, and IF the US would HAVE to start a war to stop him in the future, then it is more JUST to kill one man rather than thousands of Venezuelans and Americans in a war in the future. This is the stupid preemptive doctrine perfectly at work and supported by so many right-wingers even on this BB.

Cheers, Bluefalcon

 

Investors Business Daily said today in an editorial that Chávez is a racist: 'In recent months, Chavez has insulted President Bush, broadcast sexual and racial innuendo about Condoleezza Rice and denounced the U.S. as "the biggest terrorist." But you probably didn't hear much about that. Instead, you've gotten a full ration of remarks by Christian Broadcasting Network's Pat Robertson, who seemed to urge the U.S. government to assassinate Chavez.'

Frankly, Chávez makes me sick the way he cozies up to Commandant Castro.

Here is the link to the IBD newspaper:

http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&artnum=1

Matt, you know that I am big on England, but I do hope that you get very much lower taxes and the renewal that comes with it. I always thought that England would always be England and that it would be a place to move to for peace but we hear over here that England has become pagan and that Christianity is in terrible decline.

 

CMG, you might therefore like http://www.thisengland.co.uk/

 

He is not a kook!!
He said some things that I almost agree with.
I don't however think he would really want someone that is unsaved to be killed and go into eternity lost.
It took guts for him to apologize.
Try walking in his shoes and evaluate yourself.
Have you ever said anything in anger and disgust?
Have you ever tried to apologize with the press looking at every word you say to try to twist your words for a news story?
He apologized which shows humility.

 

............when he eventually did apologize....

Sure.

He said it. His words were not twisted. He said it.

Only after he claimed it was taken out of context.

Regards,
BiR

 

WEll BIR,
What do you want to do about Brother Pat?

 

stringeater,

He is not a kook!!

He's a self-infatuated kook. Only on CBN News do you get a news story followed by Brother Pat's "analysis".


with the press looking at every word you say to try to twist your words for a news story?

"Twist words for a news story?" So you also think that by "take him out" he meant what, take him out of Venezuela? I don't know you, but I'm sure you're smarter than that.

Personally, his comment about assassinating Chavez doesn't bother me. If Norman Schwarzkopf had said it, we might be thinking maybe we should think about the general's suggestion. I'm not against assassination of evil leaders, but I don't think that Chavez is nearly on the scale of Adolf Hitler or a Joseph Stalin. And if it is done, it is far more preferable that it be done by one of his own citizens, such as Colonel Stauffenberg with der Fuehrer.


Have you ever said anything in anger and disgust?

Sure, but not with millions of people watching! If he wasn't prepared to answer for it, he shouldn't have mouthed off. He is a good man for apologizing but we're fools to think that the apology was due to any simple self-reflection on his part rather than responding to public outrage.