Posted on 08/24/2005 10:35:22 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Conservative U.S. evangelist Pat Robertson, who called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, said on Wednesday he was misinterpreted and there were a number of ways to "take him out" including kidnapping.
"I said our special forces could take him out. Take him out could be a number of things including kidnapping," Robertson said on his "The 700 Club" television program.
"There are a number of ways of taking out a dictator from power besides killing him. I was misinterpreted," Robertson added.
Robertson, the founder of the Christian Coalition and a presidential candidate in 1988, said on Monday of Chavez, one of Bush's most vocal critics: "If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it."
"We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability." He made the comments during his "The 700 Club" television program.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Tuesday dismissed Robertson's remarks, but the White House remained silent despite calls for repudiation from Venezuela and religious leaders including the Rev. Jesse Jackson.
State Department spokesman Sean McCormack called "without fact and baseless" any ideas of hostile action against Chavez or Venezuela.
The leftist Chavez has often accused the United States of plotting his overthrow or assassination. Alongside Cuban President Fidel Castro in Havana on Sunday, Chavez scoffed at the idea that he and Castro were destabilizing troublemakers.
Chavez survived a short-lived coup in 2002 that he says was backed by the United States. Washington denies involvement.
Venezuelan officials said Robertson's remarks, while those of a private citizen, took on more significance given his ties to President George W. Bush's Christian-right supporters.
"Mr Robertson has been one of this president's staunchest allies. His statement demands the strongest condemnation by the White House," Venezuela's ambassador to the United States Bernardo Alvarez said.
sigh
Gee Pat. Why didn't you simply mention "Taking him out" could also mean a dinner, a movie and a little light petting.
Consider your shark jumped.
"What exactly would be wrong with killing Chavez? Chavez is a tinpot Marxist thug right now, but I have no doubt that he aspires to much "greater" things, and the longer we wait, the more dangerous he'll become to US interests. "
How do you know he aspires to much greater things?
Problem with assassinating foriegn leaders who might do something bad in the future is that the rest of the world would feel entirely justified in doing the same to us. Imagine -- no proof required, just a *feeling* that a US leader might do something bad and any country in the world would feel morally fine and dandy sending out the hit men. Doesn't sound too good to me.
There is a reason our government has rarely used assassination as foriegn policy, and it's not because we're all nice and huggable. It's a very selfish and self-protecting reason.
The fact that he was ordained a Southern Baptist minister, professes a love for Christ and his fellow man, and then stands up and says this - what real Christian would stand up for him!?!
He just adds to the public perception that conservative evangelical Christian leaders are idiots. See Chuck Swindoll (at 70 years old) for the reverse.
While I agree with assassination of those deserving it, I have yet to find anything about Chavez, that is deserving of death. Does anyone know, exactly what he has done, that deserves death? It seems to me, that mostly, he just won't do what we tell him to do, and he keeps questionable company.
Pat should have apologized if Chavez were worthy of life. Seeing as he is not, what's your argument?
Misinterpreted?
I say he was misinterpreted. It's kind of like saying something along the line of "if my husband says I'm having an affair, I may as well have one" or perhaps "if mom thinks I'm taking cookies from the jar..I may as well do it". His comment was nothing more-or less-than that.
The man has Freedom of Speech. I see nothing wrong with kicking around the idea of killing a brutal dictator anyway, biblically or otherwise. Everyone is acting so shocked that a "Christian" said this..but the Bible says not to "murder" - it does not necessarily prevent the killing of EVIL Persons.
Remember who he was talking about, after all. didn't I hear Chavez was going to see what he could do about this "legally". What the Hell does that mean? And isn't Chaves building up Military equipment with Russian help? Are we daft to be upset that at least ONE person in the USA calls a spade a spade?
chavez and liberals dont like ALL FREEDOM OF SPEECH, do they? Rather than be a hypocrite, we need to take this with a grain of salt.
Pat, didn't your foot taste good enough? You're in up to your thigh now.
Exactly...And let's not forget looney tune Louis Farakan who opens his mouth and spews out hate. And jesse jackson is right up there at the top too.
Should we just now have preachers bow to their most base emotions, feelings, and desires to stand in the pulpits calling for the deaths of world leaders? As long as they disagree with US foreign policy of course....can't let the preachers put Christian beliefs before nationalism..
A NON story from the get-go.
Who cares?
OK, the only issue with his statement that concerns me is that being an evangelist, I'm not sure it helps his cause by inciting violent action. But, I would agree with the sentiment, and 2 in the cap would be the most effective method of dealing with him. His successor, however, would likely be the same as he.
Where did you get that? The Bill Clinton School for Politi-Speak? I agree he (Robertson) has a right to free speech. But, for Lord's sake, he was not "misinterpreted." He called for the US to assassinate Chavez. Now he's trying to weasel out from under his remarks. And if he was "misinterpreted," why do you defend his advocating killing Chavez.
As for whether we should or shouldn't do it and your basing killing him on bible scripture... I prefer to re-read my New Testament to see what I might have missed rather than accept the notion that killing people we don't like is "biblical."
I'll get back to you afterward.
It was another in a long line of foolish comments made by this man. Hopefullly this one will persuade him to stick to addressing matters he knows a little something about, but I doubt it.
Amen brother! What Robertson said makes a heckuva lot more sense than getting thousands of our people killed. I say it's about time common sense returned. Robertson's not the crazy one, though in this day and age, I'm not sure why he'd bother making a common sense statement like that. It gets too many panties twisted.
I did not see the original broadcast, but heard someone mention yesterday that Robertson was addressing that Chavez said he was going to be assassinated by the US. Robertsons response was more like, basically, well, yea maybe that is a good idea.
That does put a different spin on it for me. It's not like he came out agitating for this. But as I said, I didn't see the context.
All this said, I don't think it is a bad idea. But Pat, if you are going to have someone killed covertly, you are not supposed to inform people of it first....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.