Assasination of Chavez [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Assasination of Chavez

Nimomunz
08-23-2005, 06:05 PM
This dude is the most backward person in the world!!
Robertson called for the assassination of Venezuela's president

Pat Robertson, host of Christian Broadcasting Network's The 700 Club and founder of the Christian Coalition of America, called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

From the August 22 broadcast of The 700 Club:

ROBERTSON: There was a popular coup that overthrew him [Chavez]. And what did the United States State Department do about it? Virtually nothing. And as a result, within about 48 hours that coup was broken; Chavez was back in power, but we had a chance to move in. He has destroyed the Venezuelan economy, and he's going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent.

You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war. And I don't think any oil shipments will stop. But this man is a terrific danger and the United ... This is in our sphere of influence, so we can't let this happen. We have the Monroe Doctrine, we have other doctrines that we have announced. And without question, this is a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil, that could hurt us very badly. We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with.

seriously what do you guys think? It disgusts me than this guy attempts to do all this in 'Jesus' name' when Jesus was peace-loving and said 'Turn the other cheek.' etc.

They should be following Christ - the Prince of PEACE - but they choose to follow Robertson instead. Robertson knows this and doesn't care as long as the money continues to roll in.

Doesn't the FCC regulate this sort of thing. I mean we can't see Janet Jackson's tit, but a major religious leader in the USA is advocating the violent over throw of a democratically elected leader isn't even noticed. This is beyond illegal.

Robertson's license to broadcast should be revoke and his ass put in jail for advocating violence. This is beyond ridiculous.

Nimomunz
08-23-2005, 06:34 PM
more info on this fools beliefs.
Here are a few of Pat Robertson’s observations on people whose faith is different from his own. On Hindus: "What is Hinduism but devil worship, ultimately?" On Muslims: "To see Americans become followers of Islam is nothing short of insanity. Why would people in America want to embrace the religion of the slaves?" Last summer Robertson opined that the Catholic understanding of Holy Communion was like telling us "to be like cannibals."

Now if you are not yet offended, brother Robertson has little regard even for mainstream Protestants: "You say, ‘You’re supposed to be nice to the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians and the Methodists and this, that, and the other thing. Nonsense! I don’t have to be nice to the spirit of the anti-Christ."

nermo
08-23-2005, 10:19 PM
seriously what do you guys think? It disgusts me than this guy attempts to do all this in 'Jesus' name' when Jesus was peace-loving and said 'Turn the other cheek.' etc.
They should be following Christ - the Prince of PEACE - but they choose to follow Robertson instead. Robertson knows this and doesn't care as long as the money continues to roll in.posted by Nimomunz

well, in this time in the world, Religion in lots of cases is just a word, or a curtain, behind which..some ppl. hide and they only try to use it to achieve their cheap goals..which are totally far from any religious ethics.this is the disaster of the era, and it goes for every religion(whether it was Christianity, Islam , Or Judaism),.
but the worst thing above all,is that unfortunately , these ppl.whatever are their intentions, they find listeners , obedient ones,who just ignorantly refuse to open their minds, and listen to the voice of reason..or ppl. who are totally decieved by those -honey -coated- words and unfortunately they didn't have the chance to find the right ppl. to talk with and to show them the way of the truth..ppl. like Robertson is not as equally dangerous as those listeners who one day 'll take the lead and do what is far most dangerous than just listening or saying this Crap.

Jim Jones
08-23-2005, 11:57 PM
well, Kennedy had Ngo Do Dhiem killed through CIA agents who helped the opponents of this Southern Vietnamese leader. It is interesting to note that Ngo was killed a few days before Kennedy. So Robertson is no different than Kennedy.
I don't condone what Robertson said but I can understand him. Chavez is actively supporting FARC and other leftist groups. One of the FARC leaders was captured in Venezuela and this strained relationship between Colombia & Venezuela. Chavez is exporting instability. lets not forget that FARC are murderous thugs. I'm sure Ingrid Betancourt will agree with this.

El Legenda
08-24-2005, 01:00 AM
. So Robertson is no different than Kennedy.
.

ohhh really when was Robertson a president of US of A?

Scotso
08-24-2005, 01:15 AM
Robertson is a moron.

Jim Jones
08-24-2005, 01:19 AM
[QUOTE=RDucky]ohhh really when was Robertson a president of US of A?[/QUOTE
No but they are both jerks. They both condone assasinations. Compris?

El Legenda
08-24-2005, 01:31 AM
[QUOTE=RDucky]ohhh really when was Robertson a president of US of A?[/QUOTE
No but they are both jerks. They both condone assasinations. Compris?

many presidents order assasinations of other threats to the world, im not sure how many religious leaders do.

liptea
08-24-2005, 06:14 AM
hahahaha. It just proves that anyone can get on TV nowadays, from Pat Robertson to Carlos Moya.

Jim Jones
08-24-2005, 12:54 PM
[QUOTE=Jim Jones]

many presidents order assasinations of other threats to the world, im not sure how many religious leaders do.
I guess that you have never heard of Aytollah Khomenei's fatwa against Salman Rushdie and fatwas pronounced by othe Muslim religious leaders. Are you backing Kennedy because he was a democrat and a pretty boy? If that's the case than damn it then. I should have mentioned Johnson who had thuggish looks, silly me.

Nimomunz
08-24-2005, 02:22 PM
assasinations happen all the time from democrats to republicans. dont Jim Jones turn this thread into right vs left!!!!! :mad: robertson is advocating murder because its cheaper than starting a war and the oil will still flow!!?? that is wrong and worse still because he wears the label of a christian!!

better yet now the US cant do it because the whole world will know its us!! :lol:

Jim Jones
08-24-2005, 02:39 PM
Anyone who advocates murdering a political opponent I condemn. I also called roberston a jerk and don't support what he did. But i have no sympathy for Chavez. I also don't subscribe to a Christian being a pacifist. I'm a Christian as you know but I'm certainly no pacifist. we need to fight fire with fire and not turn the other cheeck when hit as the bible unfortunately says so. Robertson is no different than Kennedy. I mention him but I have noproblem with his successor who helped have Che Gueverra executed. This guy was a terrorist and was no political leader so this is ok and Johnson was a democrat so you see I also support democrats :D

Nimomunz
08-24-2005, 02:57 PM
lets tick to robertson and not go off on a tangent of politics.
Pat Robertson


Marion Gordon "Pat" Robertson is an influential right-wing political and cultural figure. Robertson founded the Christian Broadcasting Network, on which he hosts the weekday broadcasts of The 700 Club. According to his official biography, Robertson is also the "founder of International Family Entertainment Inc., Regent University, Operation Blessing International Relief and Development Corporation, American Center for Law and Justice, The Flying Hospital, Inc. and several other organizations and broadcast entities." After his failed 1988 campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, Robertson founded the Christian Coalition of America, a vast conservative Christian political organization that aims to "give Christians a voice in their government again."

Robertson has a lengthy history of controversial remarks. He recently called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, in a conversation with fellow evangelical preacher Jerry Falwell on The 700 Club, Robertson agreed that feminists and gays were to blame for the attacks (Falwell apologized quickly). In 2002, Robertson angered many when he said that Islam is not a peaceful religion (he has since made other similar statements about Islam).

After the 2004 election, Robertson proclaimed that "George Bush has the favor of heaven." Robertson recently reaffirmed his belief that judges appointed by Democrats are a greater threat to the United States than Al Qaeda, Nazi Germany, or the Civil War. He is noted for his particularly hateful rhetoric toward gays and lesbians.

Quotes from Pat Robertson

"I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he [Chavez] thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it." [8/22/05]

"Islam, at least at its core, teaches violence. It's there in the Quran in clear, bold statements." [7/14/05]

God "will remove judges from the Supreme Court quickly." [1/3/05]

Gays and lesbians are "self-absorbed hedonists ... that want to impose their particular sexuality on the rest of America." [11/30/04]

Gays and lesbians are "self-absorbed narcissists who are willing to destroy any institution so long as they can have affirmation of their lifestyle." [8/16/05]

"Kwanzaa is an absolute fraud." [12/6/04]

Media Matters for America coverage of Robertson


Robertson affirmed his belief that Democratic judges are a greater threat to the U.S. than Al Qaeda, Nazi Germany or Civil War [5/2/05]

Pat Robertson's contradictory theology: God won't stop a tsunami -- but might respond to Gay Days with an earthquake [5/2/05]

Robertson wrongly attributed declining number of teen girls having sex to "welfare reform" [12/17/04]

Robertson continued conservatives' distortion of facts in Schiavo case [4/1/05]

Robertson "absolutely appalled" by comments Boxer never made [8/16/05]

Robertson continued to put words in Boxer's mouth -- and now Leahy's, too [8/19/05]

Robertson used misleading crisis rhetoric and rosy predictions to tout Bush Social Security plan [1/6/05]


Chavez was overwhelmingly elected, survived a coup, then survived a recall , and they keep talking about what a threat he is to democracy!
And Gas there is only $0.12 a gallon! What an evil prick.

Jim Jones
08-24-2005, 03:10 PM
I thought this was not a right vs. left talk? ;)

Nimomunz
08-24-2005, 03:15 PM
I thought this was not a right vs. left talk? ;)
*sigh* and so? your point is????

Nimomunz
08-24-2005, 03:23 PM
by the way about your theory on christianity not neing pacifist:
THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS

Jesus appeared to teach pacifism when he told his disciples: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God . . . . Do not resist the evil man but whoever slaps you on the right cheek turn to him the other also. And if anyone wants to sue you for your shirt, let him have your coat as well. Love your enemies. Give to everyone who asks you; when a man takes what is yours, do not demand it back" (Luke 6:30 and Matt. 5:9-44). These are hard sayings of Jesus and we might respond, as some of his listeners have done elsewhere, "Who can follow them?"

Jesus declared that the life of the Christian will be different from the life of the Old Testament Jew. One of the areas of change is in the Christian's relations with other people. Love is now to be the overriding concern. He said, "You have learned that our forefathers were told, 'Do not commit murder; anyone who commits murder must be brought to judgement.' But what I tell you is this: Anyone who nurses anger against his brother must be brought to judgment. If he abuses his brother he must answer for it to the court; if he sneers at him he will have to answer for it in the fires of hell" (Matt. 5:21-24). Jesus does not even allow a Christian to be angry with someone! What then will he do with those who kill?

Jesus taught, "You have learned that they were told, 'Eye for eye, tooth for tooth.' But what I tell you is this: Do not set yourself against the man who wrongs you" (Matt. 5:38-39). What a strong statement! Only the Son of God could call for such faith in God's control of the situation. Is he telling us that the Christian life is to be lived in the Kingdom of God and not in this world?

The apostle Paul said on the subject of peace, "Let us pursue the things that make for peace and build up the common life" (Rom. 14:19). And "The Kingdom of God is justice, peace and joy, inspired by the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 14:17). The disciple James wrote,

The wisdom from above is in the first place pure; and then peace-loving, considerate, and open to reason; it is straightforward and sincere, rich in mercy and in the kindly deeds that are its fruit. True justice is the harvest reaped by peace-makers from seed sown in a spirit of peace. What causes conflicts and quarrels among you? Do they not spring from the aggressiveness of your bodily desires? You want something which you can not have, and so you are bent on murder; you are envious, and cannot attain your ambition, and so you quarrel and fight (James 3:17-4:2).
What could be more clear? How can it be made more understandable? The Bible is plainly telling us that peace and love (pacifism) comes from God while violence and greed (the antithesis of pacifism) spring from the evil in one's heart. Can we accept this? If we have greed in our heart, don't we want to push down and hide this truth?
God would have us be at peace with all men but not all men want to be at peace with us. When we get into a situation that requires us to respond either with violence or with non-violence, does God just sit back and watch our reactions to see if we do right or is God actively involved in what is occurring? This is perhaps the heart of the matter for many people. Are we on our own or is God watching over us as a father watches over his children? To what degree does God control the affairs of human persons? If we are on our own then we need to be in control of our lives but if God is in charge we would allow God to control our actions.

The Bible has much to say about God's hand on the affairs of the world. Paul's speech in Athens makes it plain:

Since the God who made the world and everything in it is himself Lord of heaven and earth, he does not make his home in shrines made by human hands. Nor is he dependent on anything that human hands can do for him, since he can never be in need of anything; on the contrary, it is he who gives everything -- including life and breath -- to everyone. From one single stock he not only created the whole human race so that they could occupy the entire earth, but he decreed how long each nation should flourish and what the boundaries of its territory should be. And he did this so that all nations might seek the Lord and, by feeling their way towards him, succeed in finding him. Yet in fact he is not far from any of us, since it is in him that we live, and move, and exist (Acts 17:24-28).
Psalm 121 tells us that the Lord is always watching over us, day and night, to guard us. Jesus tells us that not even the sparrows are forgotten by God. "More than that, even the hairs of your head have all been counted" (Luke 12:6-7). There is much in the Bible to show us that God works all things for our good, that we need have no fear

nermo
08-24-2005, 04:18 PM
this is a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil, that could hurt us very badly. We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with.
i guess that you have never heard of Aytollah Khomenei's fatwa against Salman Rushdie posted by jimjones

i am reeeaally amazed that u've even found any similarity for the motives in these two cases..can't even believe that u 're convinced with what u're saying..

Lee
08-24-2005, 06:14 PM
I am imaging the reaction in US with the following scenario:

A very popular Muslim leader in 'put any country name here' calling on the government to assasinate George W. Bush to save a big chunk of money on war vs US. Save all the innocent soldiers in the country from dying. Save all innocent people in the country from dying.

Yes, Americans will definitely be very outraged.

Nimomunz
08-24-2005, 06:21 PM
dont be too sure about that!! 62% of Americans dont approve of Bush...............



but then of course noone wants their President to be assasinated!!!

Lee
08-24-2005, 06:34 PM
dont be too sure about that!! 62% of Americans dont approve of Bush...............



but then of course noone wants their President to be assasinated!!!

Even I don't approve of Bush, I won't be too happy to have someone call for assasination of him.

Jim Jones
08-24-2005, 07:00 PM
by the way about your theory on christianity not neing pacifist:
when did I say that Christianity was NOT pacifist? On the contrary, I support this claim. I even support 'the turn the other cheek' that you posted here! I'm saying that i'm not a pacifist. I also support abortion rights since many in the developing world reproduce like rabbits. By the way Chavez is not a democrat. Yes, Carter said that the elections were fair but he his government is still authoritarian and the country cannot be said the be democratic. Chavez is a scumbag and the best way to weaken him is to ignore him. Comments against him just fuels his power. Better to work against him behind his back :D

Nimomunz
08-24-2005, 07:27 PM
Anyone who advocates murdering a political opponent I condemn. I also called roberston a jerk and don't support what he did. But i have no sympathy for Chavez. I also don't subscribe to a Christian being a pacifist. I'm a Christian as you know but I'm certainly no pacifist. we need to fight fire with fire and not turn the other cheeck when hit as the bible unfortunately says so. Robertson is no different than Kennedy. I mention him but I have noproblem with his successor who helped have Che Gueverra executed. This guy was a terrorist and was no political leader so this is ok and Johnson was a democrat so you see I also support democrats :D
if your a christian you should be a pacifist you cant pick and choose what parts to support!!

Nimomunz
08-24-2005, 07:28 PM
I would love to answer you but the first quote is not from me, where did you get it from?
the first quote is from Robertson you likened it to this other dudes fatwa!!

Jim Jones
08-24-2005, 07:35 PM
Let me tell you something. I'm an agnostic, perhaps even an atheist. I respect Christian culture because it is my heritage. Christianity has created great civilizations and cultures such as in the U.S. and I'm happy to be a part of it. I'm an environmentalist and I strongly support birth control. But I'm still proud to call myself a conservative especially when I view people like the demented mayor of London, Ken Livingston say that he is against tighening laws that fight against extremism. i have more respect for Blair who is of the left. Contrary to some people I don't see the world in black and white.

Jim Jones
08-24-2005, 07:39 PM
the first quote is from Robertson you likened it to this other dudes fatwa!!
I don't care what Robertson says, what matters is what i say, no? I'm too tired to look back at the previous posts but I was responding to someone who said that religious leaders don't give out death threads. I don't agree with him. Roberston and ayatollahs/imams support my claim so I don't see what Nermo is trying to get at.

Nimomunz
08-24-2005, 08:18 PM
Let me tell you something. I'm an agnostic, perhaps even an atheist. I respect Christian culture because it is my heritage. Christianity has created great civilizations and cultures such as in the U.S. and I'm happy to be a part of it. I'm an environmentalist and I strongly support birth control. But I'm still proud to call myself a conservative especially when I view people like the demented mayor of London, Ken Livingston say that he is against tighening laws that fight against extremism. i have more respect for Blair who is of the ledt. Contrary to some people I don't see the world in black and white.
first your Christian when it suits you then your agnostic then your atheist. dude all three are completely contradictory to each other life sometimes has to be in black and whhite. you cant be either/or if your christian then your not agnostic if your atheist then your not agnostic if your agnostic .yada yada yada. apparently in religious matters theres no compromise. the world id black and white!!
all your saying is that your a liberal who doesnt support civil rights..doesnt exist. Christianity didnt creat the US the US is decidedly secular. the constitution doesnot have one iota of reference to God. Church and state were meant to be seperate etc etc. You support birth control so poor people in the third world dont overpower the west. :rolleyes:

Jim Jones
08-24-2005, 11:17 PM
I never ever said that I was a liberal. Don't insult me ;)
Seriously, have you not heard of Christians who don't profess their faiths, well I'm one of them, though I do go to church now and then just for the fun. :)
I don't know what's after death but I fear that there is no afterlife or reincarnation after death. You are right, I'm not an atheist but I am a Christian who is an agnostic. Hey I can be what I want to, no? I'm an agnostic who is also a conservative. I believe that human rights law is incompatible with legislative law becasue it hinders fight against terrorism. I'm also for strengthening of law to combat terrorism and Gitmo Bay is a necessary evil. So yeah I'm a con.

Purple Rainbow
08-25-2005, 08:32 AM
I am imaging the reaction in US with the following scenario:

A very popular Muslim leader in 'put any country name here' calling on the government to assasinate George W. Bush to save a big chunk of money on war vs US. Save all the innocent soldiers in the country from dying. Save all innocent people in the country from dying.

Yes, Americans will definitely be very outraged.

Excellent post! I was about to make the same post when I first read this brain-dead Robertson's remark.
In fact, any Muslim imam making suggesting to assassinate Bush would be branded a terrorist, the network broadcasting the preaching would be banned and the country the imam comes from would be a step closer to the axis of evil.
If the same scenario happens in the USA, of course nothing happens (well, except for Fox News starting a serious discussion as to wether Chavez should be assassinated.... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,166513,00.html )

The sacry thing is that I heard those television preachers like Robertson have regular viewing rates going into the tens of millions.
Religion may be a good thing, but there are a few too many wackos out there on all sides of the spectrum.

buddyholly
08-25-2005, 08:34 AM
Leave the guy alone! Anyone who can change the paths of hurricanes can't be all bad.

willie
08-25-2005, 02:34 PM
i dont know that robertson guy, but he is SOOOO right, please do it.
that chavez is a bad influence for all our countries, his crap socialist comunist ideas are spreading all over latinamerica:o

Nimomunz
08-25-2005, 02:45 PM
I never ever said that I was a liberal. Don't insult me ;)
Seriously, have you not heard of Christians who don't profess their faiths, well I'm one of them, though I do go to church now and then just for the fun. :)
I don't know what's after death but I fear that there is no afterlife or reincarnation after death. You are right, I'm not an atheist but I am a Christian who is an agnostic. Hey I can be what I want to, no? I'm an agnostic who is also a conservative. I believe that human rights law is incompatible with legislative law becasue it hinders fight against terrorism. I'm also for strengthening of law to combat terrorism and Gitmo Bay is a necessary evil. So yeah I'm a con.
do you even know what an agnostic is? :rolleyes: if your agnostic your not Christian.

Jorge
08-25-2005, 06:46 PM
well, here are my two cents about this issue.

1st. No one who considers himself/herself a true christian could be agree with a murder, and a murder under this circumstances would be even more "anti-christian". It's clear for me that this guy Robertson is anything but a "christian". He is just a religious wacko that will have a nice suite in the hell as soon as he dies... :devil:

2. Face it, Chávez it's a legitimate president, elected 5 times by the venzuelan people, you might hate him or his ideas but He is indeed a legitimate president, last elections in Venezuela were scrutinized by dozens of international organizations (among them the Carter Center). All of them were agree that the elections were clear and valid. so Chávez is a democratically elected president.
I am saying these for all those warmongers who use to say that they defends the "democracy".
so this dude (Robertson) and some idiots more are agree on killing a democratically elected president just because they don't like what he says or what he thinks? :rolleyes: That not only would be absurd but also a crime and an affront to any democratic principle.
But they have done it before, right? remember Salvador Allende ;) they have experience on killing democratic presidents.

3. If we would think on killing George W. Bush (I am not agree with that at all) and to save the world from his warmongering.... It wouldn't work. Bush is just a "show monkey" he is just the visible head of a movement that has the control of the political system in USA right now. If somebody kills that thug the congress would elect Dick Cheney, am I right? who is Dick Cheney? He is the same thing than Bush. If the system doesn't falls, no matters if you kills dozens of them, their politics wouldn't change.
So for that reason among many others that includes my principles, I am not agree on murdering any president or leader, not even thugs like Bush.

4. Sadly as some of you have stated here, this kind of dudes like Robertson have tens of millions of followers. That is scary. That people are fooled by someone that calls himself a "christian" when he already is the opposite (we can apply this example to Bush and other fanatical leaders that invoke "God" as their "Guide" on every speech, when they already are commiting many "anti-christian" actions).
take the example of Mahatma Gandhi, he wasn't christian as everybody knows, but his actions, his speech, his strategy are closer from the words of Jesus than any of these thugs that kills in the name of Jesus Christ. :mad:

fenomeno2111
08-25-2005, 08:18 PM
I'm from Venezuela but i live in the US...This prick (Robertson) is talking nonsense shit. I'm against Chavez 100% but I don't think the US should take that position. We all know US foreign politics are the most #@%#^&^ of the entire world...labelling groups as terrorist and the US govt. is the biggest terrorist in the world. Why is that prick calling for a war? if Venezuela doesn't want to sell oil to the US they don't have to sell it. FUCK THAT...you can put an embargo on Cuba but Venezuela can't do it over the US???? what kind of democracy is that...Is not that i want this to happen but nations should respect each other, blood for oil??? what great politicians we have in this country....but after Mr. Bush tells you that your son is going to die on a war he puts his arsehole face and tells you "God bless America"....

boliviana
08-25-2005, 08:20 PM
this kind of bashing is exactly what people like robertson want . . . takes the focus off of what he said and who he is connected to and what the original intent of his message was. venezuelan ambassador was right on target when he commented that it was robertson who got bush over the hump in SC primary woe those many years ago and then of course that was the momentum he needed to get the nomination and the rest is history.

the focus should be on robertson and bush . . . the lame downplay by the white house and the absolutely disgusting behavior by this administration towards all of Latin America.

Jorge
08-25-2005, 08:29 PM
I'm from Venezuela but i live in the US...This prick (Robertson) is talking nonsense shit. I'm against Chavez 100% but I don't think the US should take that position. We all know US foreign politics are the most #@%#^&^ of the entire world...labelling groups as terrorist and the US govt. is the biggest terrorist in the world. Why is that prick calling for a war? if Venezuela doesn't want to sell oil to the US they don't have to sell it. FUCK THAT...you can put an embargo on Cuba but Venezuela can't do it over the US???? what kind of democracy is that...Is not that i want this to happen but nations should respect each other, blood for oil??? what great politicians we have in this country....but after Mr. Bush tells you that your son is going to die on a war he puts his arsehole face and tells you "God bless America"....
Great post, fenomeno. Usually the anti-chavez are kinda anti-castristas from Miami, Impossible to reason with them. So I am happy to read your comment because despite being anti-chávez you are not agree with that crazy and stupid idea of killing president Chávez just because he(Chávez) could decide to sell his oil to japan, china or Europe instead USA.
the people from Venezuela who doesn't likes Chávez has to defeat him in the next elections, without a bloodshed and certianly not by an invasion from US marines corps. If the gvt of USA is really concerned about the democracy in Venezuela and latinamerica they have to respect the will of their people who has elected presidents like Lula, Kirchner, Chávez, etc. all of them thru democratic processes.

felicidades, chamo. primer anti-chávez que conzco que no desea ante todo, ante cualquier cosa (incluída una invasión a venezuela) la muerte de Hugo Chávez. La muerte no es la solución como tú has dicho. eso sólo traería más caos al país y una muy posible guerra civil donde todos perderían. la solución es organizarse en grupos políticos y derrotarlo en las urnas por la vía de la paz.

:wavey:

Jorge
08-25-2005, 08:42 PM
the focus should be on robertson and bush . . . the lame downplay by the white house and the absolutely disgusting behavior by this administration towards all of Latin America.

you are right, boliviana. we all (especially the latinamerican people) should focus more on Bush policies towards latinaamerica like the ALCA project, the Plan Colombia, the support and pression to replace the police corps with military men, which could lead the region to the old dictatorships.
and about Robertson, sadly people like him has a lot of influence among many people inside USA.

Nimomunz
08-25-2005, 09:11 PM
You seem to be quite young so I suggest that you ask one of your teachers in high school if one can be agnostic and a Christian. Don't listen to what that idiot Jorge says or you won't learn anything.
I think also that all who called themselves Christians in an earlier time, and a great majority of those who do so at the present day, would consider that belief in God and immortality is essential to a Christian. On these grounds, I should not call myself a Christian, and I should say that an agnostic cannot be a Christian.
eat that!! :wavey:
What Is an agnostic?
An agnostic thinks it impossible to know the truth in matters such as God and the future life with which Christianity and other religions are concerned. Or, if not impossible, at least impossible at the present time.

Are agnostics atheists?
No. An atheist, like a Christian, holds that we can know whether or not there is a God. The Christian holds that we can know there is a God; the atheist, that we can know there is not. The Agnostic suspends judgment, saying that there are not sufficient grounds either for affirmation or for denial. At the same time, an Agnostic may hold that the existence of God, though not impossible, is very improbable; he may even hold it so improbable that it is not worth considering in practice. In that case, he is not far removed from atheism. His attitude may be that which a careful philosopher would have towards the gods of ancient Greece. If I were asked to prove that Zeus and Poseidon and Hera and the rest of the Olympians do not exist, I should be at a loss to find conclusive arguments.

Jorge
08-25-2005, 09:14 PM
eat that!! :wavey:
check mate :lol: :yeah:

nermo
08-25-2005, 10:18 PM
'm from Venezuela but i live in the US...This prick (Robertson) is talking nonsense shit. I'm against Chavez 100% but I don't think the US should take that position. We all know US foreign politics are the most #@%#^&^ of the entire world...labelling groups as terrorist and the US govt. is the biggest terrorist in the world. Why is that prick calling for a war? if Venezuela doesn't want to sell oil to the US they don't have to sell it. FUCK THAT...you can put an embargo on Cuba but Venezuela can't do it over the US???? what kind of democracy is that...Is not that i want this to happen but nations should respect each other, blood for oil??? what great politicians we have in this country....but after Mr. Bush tells you that your son is going to die on a war he puts his arsehole face and tells you "God bless America"....posted by fenomeno2111

:yeah: perfect post, but ,that's the way it goes these days..., misleading ppl. by launching biiiig religious words or trying to find any legal motives for illegal goals is a very miserable way to control others .unfortunately it takes some ppl. a looong time to realize the true reasons for what's happening around them..

Jorge
08-27-2005, 07:49 PM
:eek:
i cant believe you bad rep me becuase of my comment, is the first time in like an year that somebody bad reps me, are you nuts:mad:
listen to me jorge im not anyone who u can bad rep, i wont sorry you easily:(, you cant bad rep someone just becuase of an idea, you think you are socialist defending chavez and all that guys, and you bad rep someone becuase of a comment....wrong way my friend, and wrong decision.
ohh so sorry if I was the 1st one bad-repping you, you must have felt the world ended when you saw those red-dots, don't you?. :D

I did-bad rep you because I thought you deserved it, as I've good-repped you several times for other reasons and you never say at least "thank you".
If you are so angry I recommend you to bad-rep me back. I promise I won't be whining and moaning ;)

I am not bad-repping you because you expressed "certain idea". I did bad-repped you because IMO what you said is simply disgusting, awful, misinformed, distorted, and contrary to any moral principle, you said:

i dont know that robertson guy, but he is SOOOO right, please do it. (kill him)*
that chavez is a bad influence for all our countries, his crap socialist comunist ideas are spreading all over latinamerica.

can't you see the huge amount of awful and misinformed things that you are saying?

1st of all you are agree with a religious wacko that wants to "assasinate" a legitimate president from a sovereign country which BTW is not even yours!
If to say that is not enough here you comes with your anti-Chávez comments based on... CNN, Fox News? what kind of news do you read?
who told you that Chávez is a communist? just because he has good relationships with Castro that makes him a communist? (Here I am not implying that to be communist is something negative, I'm saying just the truth, Chávez Isn't communist).
Hey dude stop reading the propaganda that you reads and open your eyes to the real world. Chávez might not be even socialist. Most political analysts are agree on labeling him as a "populist". Populist leaders could be both from the right and the left... and they usually mix ideas from any political source. Chávez might look too leftie but I seriously doubt about him being socialist, at least his economical policies are too "moderated" or even "capitalist".
or answer this... has he nationalized all the industries in Venezuela? Does all the Media are owned by the state? Of course not, all the media is free to criticize him and they does it! what you says is pure propaganda.

BTW I want to know how his ideas are affecting the whole continent? Is Chávez and his speeches the ones to blame for the crisis in Argentina? Don't be so naive, the people who brought your country to the ruin (luckyly now it's recovering under a "lefty" president) were the so called "Neo-Liberals" (Aka Neo-Cons in USA), yes, Ménem, a good ally of Bush senior is the main guilty of the terrible crisis that suffered your country some years ago (helped by corrupt politicians like Domingo Cavalo).
It was the so called "savage capitalism" what really destroyed your economy and what really has affected the economy of other countries in latinamerica that has followed that doctrine.
so Who is more to blame for the current conditions of your country and the rest of latinamerica? Chávez or the insane economical policies (savage capitalism aka neo-liberalism aka Neo-cons)?
How does affects the speeches of Chávez about the need to "unite" latinamerica following the Ideas of Simón Bolívar (something that I consider a good idea, almost impossible to achieve though) to some country like Chile? How the hell affects it? How the hell affects you??? How the hell affects us??? Can you explain me that??? can you? do it!!! explain me!!!! because I don't see any relationship! come on explain me!!!

Finally If all what you says were true, and Chávez has really "THAT" influence in the rest of the hemisphere (something that of course isn't true), still that's not a reason to be agreed on killing a legitimate president from a sovereign nation that is not even YOUR nation. That would be a crime and as I've said before an affront to any democratic principle and even worse, that would be a terrorist attack. Are you agree with terrorist attacks? or just with the ones that kills the people that you don't like?

I recommend you to look at your own politicians and you will find the ones to blame for the biggest economical crisis caused to your country in its history and the ones to blame for the most criminal actions against the argentine civilians.

You'll find that all of them: from the "Milicos" (La junta militar) in the 70's and early 80's and the "neo-liberals" (Ménem, Duhalde, De La Rúa, etc.) all of them goes from the ultra-right wing to some kind of moderate right-wing.
They are the ones who has affected your country (an not only yours) not a president from a foreign and relatively distant country that talks maybe too much crap but that has not influence at all.

That's why I have bad-repped you and If you want to tell me something about the bad-rep there is another thread for that, go there and posts your insults and come here to debate with ideas and reasons.

jole
08-28-2005, 12:11 AM
The interesting thing is that none of this is going away anytime soon. Venezuela has greater oil reserves than Saudi Arabia, it is just thicker and more expensive to extract.

ps - ABC Family owns. They'll show Pat Robertson and The 700 Club, then Cruel Intentions!

Someone told me before each episode of The 700 Club, ABC Family displays something to the effect of, "We are contractually obligated to show the following program." :)

undomiele
08-28-2005, 12:56 AM
I don't condone what Robertson said but I can understand him. Chavez is actively supporting FARC and other leftist groups. One of the FARC leaders was captured in Venezuela and this strained relationship between Colombia & Venezuela. Chavez is exporting instability. lets not forget that FARC are murderous thugs. I'm sure Ingrid Betancourt will agree with this.

Just because a FARC leader was caught in Venezuela doesnt mean Chavez supports him. Its incredibly hard to protect any country's borders against a neighbouring country like Colombia where the FARC are based out of the jungle in the southeast and control more than half the country - for them and their resources its simply a matter of passing from one jungle to another in Venezuela. Its not as if it would be in their interest to declare themselves to the authorities anyway :rolleyes: That Colombian politicians - puppets of the US anyway- should have accused Chavez of supporting the FARC was a PR attempt to discredit Chavez. It was all wishful thinking in that there was absolutely no evidence linking the two. So this whole thing about Chavez supporting the FARC is bullshit and its purpose was to continue to paint Chavez - a democratically elected leader - as an authoritarian with criminal connections. Its simply not true.

Jorge
08-28-2005, 01:27 AM
Just because a FARC leader was caught in Venezuela doesnt mean Chavez supports him.
That reminds me the case of Luis Posada Carriles who is a terrorist that at least killed 73 people making exploit an airplane of Cubana de Aviación in 1976.
Posada Carriles were caught in USA, and haven't been extradited to Cuba nor to Venezuela (Posada Carrilles got the venezuelan citizenship and worked in its political police and worked for the CIA as well). I wonder why he haven't been extradited when the extradition petition has being already sent. Worse than that: Posada Carriles entered to USA as an illegal immigrant. But unlike the 99% of the illegal immigrants he has received protection and haven't been extradited to Cuba nor to Venezuela.

Does this mean that the government of Bush is protecting terrorists? well, I wouldn't go that far but the comparison between Posada Carrilles being captured in USA and not extradited to be judged for his many and horrible crimes and the leader of the FARC captured in Venezuela and later brought to Colombia makes me think about the double-standard of principles and opinions that many people has when they judges the crimes of somebody labelled as communist, and how those principles and opinions changes when the dude is indeed a terrorist but is an anti-communist one.
I suppose that for many people here a terrorist that kills 80 people exploding an airplane of Cubana de Aviación is not considered as bad as a "guerrillero", am I wrong?.
I suppose that Posada Carriles is not considered a terrorist for many people but a hero who killed those red bastards, right? :rolleyes: (the victims were mainly women and kids, innocents who didn't know anything about communism or capitalism).

No people, a terrorist IS a terrorist, no matters his ideology. Said that, a terrorist is everyone who targets and kills on purpose "civilians" not military or police corps.

Posada Carriles's case will show us how much is really compromised the Bush administration in the so called war on terror. :rolleyes:

stay tuned.

Winston's Human
08-28-2005, 04:57 AM
Robertson is such a has-been moron. I cannot believe anyone takes him serious or gives him any legitimacy.

I sometimes wonder if Robertson is a liberal plant with orders to make conservatives look stupid since everything that comes out of his mouth is either sanctimonious or ignorant.

Jim Jones
08-28-2005, 03:22 PM
Just because a FARC leader was caught in Venezuela doesnt mean Chavez supports him. Its incredibly hard to protect any country's borders against a neighbouring country like Colombia where the FARC are based out of the jungle in the southeast and control more than half the country - for them and their resources its simply a matter of passing from one jungle to another in Venezuela. Its not as if it would be in their interest to declare themselves to the authorities anyway :rolleyes: That Colombian politicians - puppets of the US anyway- should have accused Chavez of supporting the FARC was a PR attempt to discredit Chavez. It was all wishful thinking in that there was absolutely no evidence linking the two. So this whole thing about Chavez supporting the FARC is bullshit and its purpose was to continue to paint Chavez - a democratically elected leader - as an authoritarian with criminal connections. Its simply not true.
I might be wrong but the FARC leader seemed to be caught in Caracas which suggests that the Venezuelan government knew about his whereabouts. In any case Chavez and his admin. were pissed at the 'kidnapping' of the FARC guy which just shows how much support he had from Venezuela.
So to you the colombian President is a stooge of the U.S.? Funny you sound like those who say Chavez is a stooge of Castro. The world is more complicated than that both Chavez and Colombia President were elected by the people. you can't have a leader who si alway from the left or right.

Jorge has a good point in talking about the political figure that the U.S. won't give away to Venezuela. But remember, Venezuela and U.S. are not on good terms. Why should the U.S. break its back for Venezuela? Anyway, I wish Venezuela good luck. they are cursed with oil. many developing nations are unstable because of this precious commodity.

undomiele
08-28-2005, 05:13 PM
I might be wrong but the FARC leader seemed to be caught in Caracas which suggests that the Venezuelan government knew about his whereabouts. In any case Chavez and his admin. were pissed at the 'kidnapping' of the FARC guy which just shows how much support he had from Venezuela.


"I might be wrong..." and "suggests that the Venezuelan government knew about his whereabouts" and Chavez being "pissed" about the FARC guy being caught when he could have been simply pissed off about Colombia's unfounded accusations of harbouring him (a natural reaction).. now this kind of language doesn't constitute proof nor certainty on your end does it? And why should that be? Cos there is no evidence or proof of the link .

I dare to you to supply some legitimate proof here Jimmy. I know the idea of supplying proof for your assertions is an alien concept to you but you could at least try.

Besides that, I absolutely see no reason how or why Chavez would benefit from funding or supporting a loose gun like the FARC. What would be his motive here?

So to you the colombian President is a stooge of the U.S.? Funny you sound like those who say Chavez is a stooge of Castro. The world is more complicated than that both Chavez and Colombia President were elected by the people. you can't have a leader who si alway from the left or right.

Actually I'm of the opinion that the world would be a lot less complicated if idiots like you actually developed a brain. :rolleyes: Colombia is well within the sphere of US directives and influences. Under Chavez, Venezuela isn't. Please, everyone knows that.

Jorge has a good point in talking about the political figure that the U.S. won't give away to Venezuela. But remember, Venezuela and U.S. are not on good terms. Why should the U.S. break its back for Venezuela? Anyway, I wish Venezuela good luck. they are cursed with oil. many developing nations are unstable because of this precious commodity.

The US and Venezuela are on good terms economically. Thats the relationship that actually matters. Everthing else is just empty rhetoric. Venezuela sells its oil at ridiculously high prices to the US - and the US gets its oil like the addict it is. If there's any point to Chavez's rhetoric at all that would be making the US-Venezuelan relationship SEEM unstable so that prices would hit the roof even further. But in actuality, the supposed "unstable" relationship is a very stable one. The US has no choice but to buy Venezuelan oil and try to keep oil prices down. The last thing it would want is to take Chavez out - do you have any idea how that would disrupt the world oil market with Iraq being tied up as it is ???? No way. The US could in no way afford to do that with Venezuelan society being as volatile as it is.

The truth is this Robertson fiasco is ultimately going to benefit Venezuela - thats the irony of it all. Investors are nervous as hell about the global oil market as it is and the Robertson talk will only help boost oil prices, much to Vza's benefit and to the chagrin of US buyers. ;) In the end, Chavez is no dummy. He's pumping the US for all its worth. And rightly so.

Jim Jones
08-28-2005, 10:04 PM
'Actually I'm of the opinion that the world would be a lot less complicated if idiots like you actually developed a brain. Colombia is well within the sphere of US directives and influences. Under Chavez, Venezuela isn't. Please, everyone knows that.'

Ok, and what about when the previous President, Pastrana who was in power? He was from the opposition. Of course at that time Clinton was in power so probably according to you the U.S. under the democrats influenced the vote in Colombia, pfff. Hey I would love to supply you with proof, problem is I also work. Today is a free day but tomorrow I will be busy working (I do come here too when I work but don't tell my boss;)) I'm also doing forex day trading though. But remind me later on & may be I'll supply you with proof. But you can get it from the web, like from wikipedia or AP news. Look, as I told Nim, I don't believe that the world is divided in black and white. There are also shades of gray and I belong in that area.

I will be happy the day there is no oil in this world which puts a curse on poor nations and the environment. In 50 years from now oil field will be seriously depleted. It would be good to have kids when we are 50- at least for guys :) because they will grow up in a world that's a little different than the one we experienced. That should be fun. The future is so unknown. Maybe soem of our descendants can visit us through a time machine. Time can be bent we just have to know to travel through time. We may also be able to extract DNA from Mammouth fossils and maybe create living mamouths. This I read from a science journal. Would be great if that's the case. i won't witness it but my descendants would if it happens. Alright I getting off topic. I'm not delusional, just being a little creative :lol:

Hokit
08-29-2005, 02:34 AM
seriously what do you guys think? It disgusts me than this guy attempts to do all this in 'Jesus' name' when Jesus was peace-loving and said 'Turn the other cheek.' etc.

I won't take his talk on religion and Christianity too seriously. Most likely, his opinions are more political. Religion is just a convenient euphemism for him and many other politicians to use.

Jorge
08-29-2005, 09:39 AM
Jorge has a good point in talking about the political figure that the U.S. won't give away to Venezuela. But remember, Venezuela and U.S. are not on good terms. Why should the U.S. break its back for Venezuela?

Perhaps because USA has signed an extradition agreement with Venezuela and they're forced by its own law to respect that agreement sending Posada Carriles to Venezuela where he should be judged by his crimes.
If USA doesn't sends Posada Carriles to Venezuela, the gvt of USA would be violating the extradition agremeent as well as the conventions of The Hague and Montreal, besides to be protecting a declared terrorist.

In venezuela doesn't exists the "death penalty" so Posada Carriles wouldn't be executed but punished with 30 to 50 years on jail.

abraxas21
03-28-2013, 08:05 PM
http://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/mundo/2013/03/28/hugo-chavez-se-reune-con-salvador-allende-y-el-che-guevara/

Venezuelan TV channel ViVe launched a video featuring deceased Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez in his arrival to heaven where he's received by historical characters such as Ernesto Che Guevara, Salvador Allende, Eva Perón, Pedro Camejo, Manuelita Sáenz, Ernesto Camilo Cienfuegos and Simón Bolívar. His grandmother, Rosa Inés, reaches a hand for him.

buddyholly
03-28-2013, 09:10 PM
That is the definition of cheesy. Especially his "Ha, fooled you suckers" final look into the camera.

But I think you may have resurrected the wrong thread. I thought maybe the Venezuelans had finally got proof that the US caused the cancer.

But thanks for resurrecting the inimitable Jorge.

Chair Umpire
03-28-2013, 09:15 PM
An outstanding and brilliant example of independent media this ViVe channel.

The arrogant western world should take note about this and learn a few things.

abraxas21
03-28-2013, 10:50 PM
the video came with this note (my translation):

I finish by telling you an anecdote of the times in which i worked as Director of Foreign Relations in the presidency. Late one night, president Chávez and his assessors came to Asunción, Paraguay, in an official visit during the government of president Nicanor Duarte. Given how late it was, we headed directly to the hotel in which we're going to stay. As we got there, the President saw a couple of kids who were no more than 10 years of age outside the hotel lobby. He went to them and asked them what they were doing at that hour. The kids said they hadn't eaten. Immediately, he ordered food to be brought and began talking to them. He questioned them about their home, their parents, whether or nor they were studying, until after a while, he made sure the kids were taken to their home and were taken care of.

A few months passed by and we came back to Asunción, this time in a meeting of Mercosur. Again we came late and, again as we were arriving to the hotel we saw the same kids who called "Chávez, Chávez". The president noticed them and again he reached them with the idea of questioning them about being away from home so late. He asked them what are you doing here? Haven't you eaten? They answered: "we have eaten every day since your last visit Now we came to say hi because we knew you were coming to Paraguay".

Chávez, universal man

by Sergio Rodríguez Gelfenstein

buddyholly
03-28-2013, 11:08 PM
What does that even mean? Who was feeding them after the first visit? And why were they not then fed before? Are we supposed to think Chavez performed a miracle? It sure reads like a parable from the Bible.

PS: I think, and certainly hope, that Chair Umpire had his tongue firmly in his cheek.

abraxas21
03-28-2013, 11:22 PM
What does that even mean? Who was feeding them after the first visit? And why were they not then fed before? Are we supposed to think Chavez performed a miracle? It sure reads like a parable from the Bible.

PS: I think, and certainly hope, that Chair Umpire had his tongue firmly in his cheek.

Chávez is, like we say in south america, a caudillo who now has a cult like figure. He'll go down in history almost at the same level as Ché Guevara or Allende. He's a myth.

buddyholly
03-28-2013, 11:53 PM
Chávez is, like we say in south america, a caudillo who now has a cult like figure. He'll go down in history almost at the same level as Ché Guevara or Allende. He's a myth.

.
Hee hee,I think you mean "legendary". A myth is something that never happened. If only........

Wing Man Frank
03-28-2013, 11:55 PM
Religion is such an epic fail.