Assasinating Hugo Chavez
Pat Robertson wants us to assassinate Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
Now first of all - this guy has to go. I think we all know that. The question is how? Go to war with him and cost hundreds of our soldiers to die in the process to get him in custody? or trade all those lives for one - him. Its the same thing with saddam.
Should we use one blade to kill him? or a thousand swords, along with civilian casualties? It isnt that hard to answer.
I know that as a christian you shouldnt talk about shooting people, but think about it. I would trade in a heartbeat all the lives that it took to get saddam in custody for saddams life. Why wont you? Why is it so hard to get past this? its the same principle. Assasinate Hugo Chavez, and we wont waste Civilian lives, lives of our troops, and it be a hell of a lot less expensive.
Now first of all - this guy has to go. I think we all know that. The question is how? Go to war with him and cost hundreds of our soldiers to die in the process to get him in custody? or trade all those lives for one - him. Its the same thing with saddam.
Should we use one blade to kill him? or a thousand swords, along with civilian casualties? It isnt that hard to answer.
I know that as a christian you shouldnt talk about shooting people, but think about it. I would trade in a heartbeat all the lives that it took to get saddam in custody for saddams life. Why wont you? Why is it so hard to get past this? its the same principle. Assasinate Hugo Chavez, and we wont waste Civilian lives, lives of our troops, and it be a hell of a lot less expensive.
26 Comments:
It might be a good idea if we stop thinking about death in America for a while now. With the both the hurricane disaster and the war in Iraq, more casualties are the very last thing anyone should be calling for. Another point: "Thou shall not kill" is one of the 10 commandments. Why is it that conservatives are so against gay rights, because it merely talks about it in the bible, while they support the war and Pat Robertson, clearly going against one of the ten commandements? I thought that breaking one of those was a bad thing, but maybe I'm out of the loop...
It seems a lot more convincing to preach out of the bible if you obey all of it rather than only a few verses.
Oh, and P.S.
http://morekoolaidplease.blogspot.com/2005/06/in-with-politicians.html#comments
allisoni balloni: hmmm. . I was probably In a bad mood. I dont hate him, but he is quite an embarrasment to the democratic party.
I completely disagree with that, as I have met John, Elizabeth, and Kate Edwards, respect their family and their views, and know the history of John's life and politcal career. I would appreciate a response to both that and my comment on this post.
OK, you warned in a comment, not to read your blog. I disobeyed your warning and came here to check it out. What a crock of shit!! My bad.
Allisoni - "It seems a lot more convincing to preach out of the bible if you obey all of it rather than only a few verses. "
Amen. That is all I can say. You are so right about this - and THAT is exactly why Christians have no credibility anymore. 99% of people who call themselves "Christians" are not practicing what Christ came to teach and to do - they are practicing a selective form of religious Christianity that is more like Morality Management than any real belief in God.
Jayson - this is a new low for you. You are basically condoning cold-blooded murder here. I suggest you make some retractions right quick - after all, Pat Robertson did, and seeing as he seems to be the personification of your brand of religiolitics, you may want to follow his lead.
It is disgusting that a so-called Christian could even say something like that. For shame!
First of all, I see no difference in the religious fanaticism of the Islamic Mullahs who issue 'fatwah's against those they oppose, and what the not-so-right Reverend Robertson did.
Secondly, it's illegal to assassinate the leader of another country, according to world law and U.S. law.
Thirdly, Chavez is a democratically elected president, not a dictator.
Forthly, ask Pat what Jesus would do?
Fourthly, that is.
Too bad Pat Roberson isn't in hell yet that where he should belong and he calls himself a christian? More like an apostate and hypocrite. How about this send his sorry vanilla ass of his in jail.
Saint thankfully you are the only few that see this light...
When you said this guy has to go, I thought you meant Robertson and was just about to agree with you.
Wow, you not only left a comment on my site, but you are smart, too! Keep annoying people, because it's funny.
Can we send Pat Robertson to assasinate Chavez? A fanatic vs fanatic death match?
Even I think assasination is going too far? But next time there is a mudslide in Venezuela or his government is being overrun by guerillas we should respond only by reminding him of his comments.
Did you see that Chavez is sending aid to us for Katrina victims? The monster!
And NYGirl, I would complain about Stephanopouls suggesting assassination just as much as I would Robertson. Maybe more, because not everyone thinks Stephanopouls is a ridiculous moron.
allisoni: so you wanna obey the first commandment, huh? thou shalt not kill? okay. then tell me this. should we just leave terrorist alone and leet them kill us?
and in response to john edwards: Well, he said something really moronic in his debate with cheney. It was on stem cell research, he said that if you vote for him, you will see christopher reeve walk out of that wheelchair! All my respect for him, if there was any, went down the toilet at that point. It was pretty ironic too that christopher reeve died like a week after that.
former conservative: I remember commenting on your site! Thats pretty funny! Its not funny that you went to the dark side, however.
Saint: ok, Im sorry. I think that we should go to war with him instead and have hundreds of american troops die to capture or kill him instead. sounds like a wonderful plan.
nygirl: excactly. the democrats have no problem with corrupted comments by thier party, but when the other side says something, they tear him apart. the hypocrisy is sickening.
Micheal Walton: well, my original goal is to reach people, but annoying liberals is always a nice bonus.
Don't even get me started on stem cell research. It WOULD create hope for those like Christopher Reeve, and I'm not exactly sure why that upsets you.
As far as the ten commandments go, "Thou shall not kill" isn't the first, but the sixth. Your response to my comment is completely backwards, as two wrongs usually do not make a right. If they choose to kill people, that is their sin. If we choose to kill people, that is ours. Us doing it in revenge of them doing it does not really help, unless there are some other unwritten commandments that God told you about but forgot to tell the rest of us. And once again, just to make this political, if we want to fight terrorism we should probably think a little bit more about the real threat, hiding out somewhere in Afghanistan.
allisoni balloni: Im not talking about stem cell research. It would've been fine if he said something like it would give hope to disabled people, but he didnt say that. He said if you VOTE for him, you WILL see christopher reeve walk out of that wheelchair. If you cant see how stupid that is, then I'm wasting my time talking to you.
bush:"leet them kill us? "
I find your so called Christian attitude sickening. No matter what the end result is, I somewhat doubt that Scary Chavez is going to harm a single American citizen apart where it hurts the most, the wallet. In controlling massive oilfields that America wishes the could get they hands on they make Hugo Chavez out like he is a threat.
You may not know this but from the rest of your blog it's pretty evident you're a victim of neo-republican propaganda.
I may also be a victim of propaganda but i know for a fact that I don't claim to be part of a religion based on rules that you dont decide whether you follow.
"Thou shalt not kill". Now thats under Any Circumstance. When you start changing your beliefs you are working against god and trying to change the word of God.
There is NO LEGITMATE REASON for the USA to invade another country for resources like it did in Iraq and like it did in South America in the past. More and more money will have to be spent on the already gross defense budget. This is money that doesn't need to be spent.
This is money that in the last 10 years should have been spent on social reforms and as Hurricane Katrina has demonstrated, spent on REAL THREATS rather than a US foreign policy that has changed sides more than John Kerry. (RE: US supporting the Taliban in attempting to otherthrow the Scary Communists (which is exactly the same as the current threat: Over the top and designed to scare people into voting Republican. It won't work again. Unless Bush starts another war to make America afraid again.
Can you agree with me that America should focus on real threats rather wars that have no legitimate basic (regarding there being no link between Iraq and Sept 11th apart from the only connections Republicans seem to need, in both cases Muslims were involved.
The point is, killing someone goes against God's word. No matter how many lives may be saved, you are violating the Christian faith and changing teachings designed to be followed for the good of mankind. Even if 1000 people will die unless you kill someone, you are setting a dangerous precident. next time will you kill someone with 100 lives at risk? 10 lives? 1 life? It's important to remember that rules are their for a reason and the moment you break those rules you leave everything the christian faith should have taught you.
You are young ideas such as "Why is it so hard to get past this?" are narrow minded statements that thankfully real republicans avoid and actually realise they go against moral standards that should never be broken.
You make me lose confidence the christian faith is becoming dogmatic and irreversabley changed by people like yourself changing it whenever you see any easy solution to a comlicated problem.
Please respond.
"There is NO LEGITMATE REASON for the USA to invade another country for resources like it did in Iraq and like it did in South America in the past."
If we went to Iraq for thier oil we'd have tons of oil now, wouldnt we? There has been no evidence of us taking any oil from iraq and no evidence that we will. Kuwait had tons of oil, too, and we invaded them in 1990, we didnt take thier oil either.
"Thou shalt not kill"
Guess what? I just read exodus 20 and guess what the real commandment is? thou shalt not murder. So God is saying that we shouldnt commit murder, so he is implying that there are exceptions.
"The point is, killing someone goes against God's word. No matter how many lives may be saved, you are violating the Christian faith and changing teachings designed to be followed for the good of mankind. Even if 1000 people will die unless you kill someone, you are setting a dangerous precident. next time will you kill someone with 100 lives at risk? 10 lives? 1 life? It's important to remember that rules are their for a reason and the moment you break those rules you leave everything the christian faith should have taught you."
So what I just said pretty much throws what you just said out the window.
You should really think about what your saying. The United States of America just going to war with other countries to take their oil. You know, if this was really happening the entire world would be outraged. But the liberals can think of anything to make bush look bad with their Imaginations.
Have you read my post on the iraq war? Go read it.
Did you need that to hold against him because you couldn't find anything else wrong with him? Have you hear the current president speak...?
First of all, I have two bibles.One of them (The New Catholic Edition)reads "You shall not kill." The other (the Saint Joseph Edition) ALSO reads, "You shall not kill."
Second of all, when is killing someone NOT murder? I also have Webster's Dictionary here, and the definition of murder is to "kill (a human being) unlawfully." Certainly, there are exceptions in the face of the law when it comes to things like self defense, but even then, you would have murdered them in the name of self defense and therefore not be punished for it. Because of the unjust cause and the innocent lives that have been lost, there is basis not only to impeach our president but also to charge him of massive war crimes. Because there is basis for both of those things, the war is unlawful and therefore disobeys even the commandment that you are reading in your bible. IT'S WRONG. You shouldn't have to SEARCH for a reason to kill someone.
"Guess what? I just read exodus 20 and guess what the real commandment is? thou shalt not murder. So God is saying that we shouldnt commit murder, so he is implying that there are exceptions."
This is the only thing you have been right about so far (relating to this post, though precious little otherwise as well), in my opinion - the correct translation is "murder", not simply "kill". And yeah, there are exceptions - self-defense being one of them or the defense of others (especially those who cannot defend themselves). The Bible also does not seem to consider what a soldier does to be murder - however this is assuming the conflict is a just one. In the case of Iraq, I do not believe that the soldiers on the ground who are fighting against insurgents and homicide bombers (I had to steal that one from K~ as it is a much more fitting description of what they do) to be murderers, from a Biblical perspective. However, this label may perhaps apply those who have engineered the war, as they have not necessarily done so for a legitimate or just purpose. If one is to assume that GWB is the ultimate architect of the Iraq (something which I would be rather dubious about - he seems more pawn than mastermind, but the deceptions of the enemy are tricky at best), I would say that makes him a murderer.
So yeah, you're right about the disctinction in the Bible between "killing" and "murder", which really does more to invalidate your entire post than anything I could say. To assassinate someone implies pre-meditation and cold-blood, as opposed to facing an enemy justly in combat. It is a dishonourable practice that makes liberal use of deception and surprise. Sounds like murder to me.
One should also consider who we are talking about assassinating. Hugo Chavez is a communist, true. Is Communism the devil? I think not. Like anything else, communism can be looked at as a positive ideology, though impossible to carry out due to the innate sinfulness of man. That being said, however, it isn't as though the guy is a despotic dictator like Stalin or something - he is a lawfully elected president. He has control over a lot of oil, otherwise the U.S. wouldn't even care what he does. He never threatened to do anything besides A) Make the U.S. pay more for his oil, which is his legal right and perogitive to do and B) Defend himself and his country against an invading army, which Biblically is a lawful and just thing to do. Meanwhile, "righteous christians" like Pat Robertson want to murder the guy. No wonder people are losing faith in "Christianity". Hardly anyone even knows what it really means anymore, especially the average "Christian".
So, to answer Cate's question, what do we do about Hugo Chavez if we are to believe that murdering him is wrong? Well, how do you deal with someone in your everyday life who chooses not to be cooperative to your personal agenda? If the car dealership won't give you that extra 10% off of your dream car, do you put a gun to the manager's head and demand he accede to your demands? Do you go get a high-powered rifle and shoot him in the back of the head while he is watching the 10 o'clock news? I don't think so. The kinds of people who do that are called murderers or psychopaths.
So you tell me how we should deal with Hugo Chavez.
To BC08
(smacks BC08)
Saint: thanks for clearing that up. When I heard the assasination remark this was just my original thought, that it would save a lot of lives. But your right, we should not disobey the commandments. My apologies.
anonymous: I saw this same remark on ottmans blog. Im guessing your the same person, no? I can guarentee that you havent really smacked me in real life, however. Why do you want to smack me?
I wonder how it feels to be as all-knowing as Saint... and perfect in every way! It must be a heavy burden to carry, being perfect.
Mira maldito estúpido de mierda, I don't know what u have inside your head but I guess it's the same thing you have in your intestine. How you can support that false Christian Pat Robertson. I beg God iluminates all the gringo's minds because you're destroying this world. Instead try to eliminate the "terrorism" you should combat the cause of that. My president is a great man and if he would die because of your country, we (venezuelans) would take weapons to fight against your corrupted nation in your own ground (we're near) but not killing civilians like you do in Iraq or Afganistan or every nation you invade. We'd be there to eliminate at all cost your president. Grow up child!, you don't know nothing about life and the people suffering, you don't know a shit about this world.
Post a Comment
<< Home