Robertson again calls for Chavez's assassination

"During the February 2 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, Christian Coalition founder and 700 Club host Pat Robertson reiterated his call for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez."

"When co-host Alan Colmes asked Robertson, "[I]f he [Chavez] were assassinated, the world would be a safer place?" Robertson answered, "I think South America would." When Colmes later pressed Robertson, asking, "Do you want him [Chavez] taken out?" Robertson retorted, "Not now, but one day, one day, one day." Earlier, Colmes had asked, "Should Chavez be assassinated?" Robertson explained that "one day," Chavez woulwill "be aiming nuclear weapons; and what's coming across the Gulf [of Mexico] isn't going to be [Hurricane] Katrina, it's going to be his nukes." Co-host Sean Hannity agreed that "the world would be better off without him where he [Chavez] is, because he is a danger to the United States."

Yes, I thought his apology for his original statement was fake, didn't you? As you can see, he's nothing more than an American version of a radical Imam who corrupts the teachings of his religion. Robertsons' version of Christianity is an afront to Christ and is just as dangerous as "the terrorists" with their warped ideology.

As for Chavez, just how does he threaten us? What is he doing that causes someone to talk of such drastic measures as assasination? Robertson claims that "one day" he'll be aiming nukes at us, but why? Why is Robertson making such a fuss over someone who in no way threatens our safety? Is it for the same reason our administration does? Chavez refuses to be a puppet for our corporate government, and simply because of that, he should be killed because of what he might do some distance in the future?

Robertson would have us believe that Chavez is organizing a Marxist Bloc that will launch nukes at us first chance he gets. He's attempting to stir up our old Cold War fears of the Soviets. Not living down there myself, I can't say I know his intentions or what exactly he's doing in his country, but I do know what he says he wants to do. He wants to relieve his country and the region from U.S. dictates, and corporate exploitation. That's exactly what every revolutionary in the region throughout the 20th century has wanted. The media calls him Leftist, Robertson calls him Marxist (which he isn't), but neither definition automatically makes him a threat to us.

During the Cold War, most countries in the world had to take sides. A choice between two evils. If they sided with us, that meant that they allowed our military bases, and especially our economic exploitation. That exploitation led to civil unrest by the poor. The poor would ask for our help, but we'd help their rulers suppress them instead. If they revolted, and succeeded, they naturally wouldn't choose to adopt a capitalist system that had abused them. Even if they didn't originally want anything to do with the Soviets, the Soviets were the only ones strong enough to give them another option. If they didn't go with the Soviets, we would just move back in and appoint another dictator. If they did choose the Soviets, they eventually found out they were no better off. At least we could tell ourselves that if they remained a Soviet satellite, they would soon be nuclear armed, and aiming at us. And they would. But today is not yesterday. Without a comparable nuclear powered superpower to protect them, no one on the planet could possibly hope to beat us in a nuclear war. As little sense as starting a war with us made even to the Soviets, it makes even less sense to any one else today. Just as the Iranians would be foolish to send nukes to a nuclear armed Isreal, or us, they'd have to know in the end, they'd cease to exist. North Koreans know they can't hope to survive a nuclear war with anyone, especially us, either. So too the countries south of the border. The only thing they could use them for, is protection from invasion. And just who is it that seems most likely to invade anyone today? hmm? If we don't screw with them, they won't screw with us. They'd lose anyway and they know it.

So, let's stop listening to any type of leader here who starts warmongering just because someone doesn't like being pushed around by our corporations, or political system. Our government has it's own agenda, but we don't have to follow along behind like a flock of sheep. Their geopolitical plans will have no benefits for us. Their globalization plans will only make us poorer (as is happening right now), and perpetually open to terrorist attack from the disenfranchised.

But wait, why would Robertson care if anyone nuked us? According to his mental illness, it would only be Divine retribution for people who reject God and Intelligent Design. The rest should have nothing to worry about.


Why do I even bother. If our leaders compare Chavez to Hitler (I think someone has already), and scare us enough by saying he harbors "terrorist"(wait for it...), we'll go along. We usually do.