ARS on Twitter
RSS
Who Is Worse-Robertson or Chavez?
Posted by Raven on August 26th, 2005
I’ve been reading stuff all week about Pat Robertson’s call for assasination of one Hugo Chavez.
“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…”
Was this politically correct? No. Was it a terrible thing to say? Probably. But was it wrong? I don’t think so. I don’t like Robertson, he’s too religious for me. I consider him to be a bit too far to the right on most issues.
But…
We cannot forget who Chavez is, what he stands for, and the fact that he supports the Islamic terrorist movement.
He is a enemy to America.
A day after the September 11 terrorist attacks, President Chavez declared that “The United States brought the attacks upon itself, for their arrogant imperialist foreign policy.” Chavez also described the U.S. military response to bin Laden as “terrorism,” claiming that he saw no difference between the invasion of Afghanistan and the September 11 terrorist attacks.
While the United States considers Saddam Hussein a threat to world peace, Chavez has hailed Saddam as his “brother” and business “partner.” In the past two years Chavez has continued to cultivate relationships with the governments listed in the State Department’s roll of state sponsors of terrorism–he has been particularly vocal in his support for the Iranian regime.
Last December a high-level Venezuelan military defector gave sworn testimony that terrorist links exist between al Qaeda and the Chavez government. The defector, President Chavez’s personal pilot, alleges that one operation involved the transfer of close to $1 million in cash to Osama bin Laden.
Don’t forget about Chavez’s support of socialism, the human rights violations, his friendship with Fidel Castro, his support of Iran’s goals for nuclear weapons….
Pat Robertson may be a bit too looney for most of us, but he spoke of things that needed to be said. It takes balls to do this, and I respect him for saying what he said. Wizbang has some thoughts along these same lines.
UPDATE: Rick has some thoughts too, about the Comedy Hour of Hugo Chavez…go read it. LOL
August 26th, 2005 at 10:08 am
[...] [...]
August 26th, 2005 at 4:16 pm
The scumbag Chavez is buddy buddy with Castro. Pat Roberts was right, why not take the scumbag out.
August 26th, 2005 at 9:03 pm
And he’s buddy with Bin Laden. Saddam was his friend as is the current leader of Iran. Not a nice guy at all.
August 26th, 2005 at 10:23 pm
Like all of our ranting about Castro has done anything? It is a crock of bullshit. If Castro were such a threat that stupid ass Neo-Cons make him out to be, why didn’t we invade Cuba after 9/11? Why are not they apart of the “axis of evil.” If we are going through the efforts of creating a list, why should it not be unabridged?
I may not like Chavez’s policies either, but unlike Saddam he was elected but a majority of the people in an election overseen by the US and the UN. When is the US going to stop being the worlds policeman? You call yourself conservative… poor Goldwater is rolling in his grave now.
As Stossel says… give me a break.
August 27th, 2005 at 12:55 pm
Mens Rea,
You don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.
Chavez may have been “elected by a majority,” but elections in Latin America are notoriously crooked. On top of that, most of population is suffering in poverty beyond your imagination, so they naturally grab at any promise, almost always unfulfilled even with the inflated currency, to put food in their mouths. Add to THAT the illiteracy rate, and you’ll get a clearer idea of what happens in their so-called elections. As the saying goes among the Latinos, “We’re one helluva people to govern.”
Believe me, Simon Bolivar (El Liberador) is rolling in his grave over this election.
Hugo Chavez is currying favor with the Arabs, via the Arab Summit in Brazil. Al-Qaeda was well represented at the summit. This little detail was reported in U.S. News & World Report before Chavez was “elected.”
Pay a visit to the heartland of Latin America (not the resorts), and you’ll get an education you’d wish you hadn’t found.
Before you start holding forth on Latin America, do some research.
Robertson may have been out of line, but he had his fact correct about the danger which Hugo Chavez poses.
August 28th, 2005 at 9:19 pm
Chavez was elected like Saddam Hussein was elected. When a voter has the barrel of a weapon pointed at his or her head, they will usually vote for the party holding the weapon.
By the way, one of the reason these third and forth world cess pools want to maintain their high rates of illiteracy is so that the power structure can maintain its hold over the constituency.
But I do understand why you would want to ignore the facts; it is a convenient way to maintain an undefensible position.