Pat Robertson on Ariel Sharon's stroke:
===========================
Robertson suggests God smote Sharon
Evangelist links Israeli leader's stroke to 'dividing God's land'

(CNN) -- Television evangelist Pat Robertson suggested Thursday that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine retribution for the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, which Robertson opposed.

"He was dividing God's land, and I would say, 'Woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the [European Union], the United Nations or the United States of America,'" Robertson told viewers of his long-running television show, "The 700 Club."

"God says, 'This land belongs to me, and you'd better leave it alone,'" he said.

Robertson's show airs on the ABC Family cable network and claims about 1 million viewers daily.

Sharon, 77, clung to life in a Jerusalem hospital Thursday after surgery to treat a severe stroke, his doctors said.

The prime minister, who withdrew Israeli settlers and troops from Gaza and parts of the West Bank last summer over heated objections from his own Likud Party, was breathing with the aid of a ventilator after doctors operated to stop the bleeding in his brain.

In Washington, President Bush offered praise for Sharon in a speech on Thursday.

"We pray for his recovery," Bush said. "He's a good man, a strong man. A man who cared deeply about the security of the Israeli people, and a man who had a vision for peace. May God bless him."
Daniel Ayalon, Israel's ambassador to the United States, compared Robertson's remarks to the overheated rhetoric of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

He called the comments "outrageous" and said they were not something to expect "from any of our friends."

"He is a great friend of Israel and a great friend of Prime Minister Sharon himself, so I am very surprised," Ayalon told CNN.
============================
Read the rest here. (http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/01/05/robertson.sharon/)

After this, and many of the other comments made in the past several months by Mr. Robertson, he'd do best to stop opening his mouth.

Robertson seems to be suffering some form of senility in his old age. What he needs to to is stick to his shilling for money ministries and leave the thinking to those who are more sound of mind.

Originally posted by HaVoK
Robertson seems to be suffering some form of senility in his old age.

I agree. Or perhaps worse - he may just be completely nuts.

I've been a frequent viewer of the 700 Club since the late 70's. It's always been good for a laugh. Robertson's latest comments are nothing new. He's been bonkers for years.

I'm glad that Robertson speaks for conservative america and not liberal america.

To all the conservatives ... keep him front and center please with these god remarks and his threats to assassinate heads of government and other whack-job statements so voting americans are reminded that voting for christo-fascist republicans is the same as voting for insanity.

We know, in truth, that conservatives fully back Robertson and his demons - otherwise they would decry him and banish him from the republican party so please be assured we liberals are not being fooled.

Another silly post by Lungdop Philing.

Pat Robertson speaks for conservative America no more than Michael Moore speaks for liberal America. They both speak for themselves and if a few deluded fools wish to llisten to their meanderings that is there choice.

If Lungdop wishes to tar conservatives with the Pat Robertson brush he had better be willing to be tarred himself with the Jane Fonda brush.

I noticed the white house and the republican party did not chastise PR when he advised them to assassinate Chavez.

Now, how does that work? - considering every democrat in the country called for PR to apologize yet not one single republican joined in with anything other than defending him.

PR is a republican tool bought and paid for ... learn to live with it.

That because Robertson was speaking what they were thinking. The White House called it "inappropriate" while Chavez was calling for him to brought up on international crimes. I can't remember where I saw it but the US had far more condemnation for someone talking bad about Sharon then they did for PR calling for assassination of Chavez.

http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2005/082205.asp

They both speak for themselves and if a few deluded fools wish to llisten to their meanderings that is there choice. Unfortunatly many many fools follow robertson straight to Bush. But hey look at this...I typed Bush into the 700 clubs website and found line for line Republican talking points (that are even repeated by Busheviks on these boards):

Abstract: Terrorism: Liberal Courts Protect Terrorists. Courting Disaster p. 241-242. At the end of the 2003-2004 term, the Supreme Court announced a spate of controversial decisions in...

Also on the government website to help Katrina victims Pat Robertsons 'charity' was listed 2nd after the red cross (not to mention that all of the 'charities on the list were religous in nature)

Robertson even said that Bush's (s)election was ordained by god.

I wish I could find it Robertson had a thing for his special "age defying shakes" and claimed he could lift over 2000 lbs.

And yes robertson is ape-shit insane.

http://www.defconamerica.org/meet-the-religious-right/pat-robertson-1.html

But then again so is Bush:
"We pray for his recovery," Bush said. "He's a good man, a strong man. A man who cared deeply about the security of the Israeli people, and a man who had a vision for peace. May God bless him." Sharon was a war criminal. If God actually struck down mass murderers then Robertson would be right:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11479.htm

Theres also a thread on the Sabre massacre on the hisotry page.

Oh and speaking of religious wing nut Falwell just said that the Lewinsky affair was blown up to get clinton to take pressure of Israel:
http://www.iamthewitness.com/by_MichaelCollinsPiper3.htm

Oh and lets all hope that Netanyahu doesn't continue/spark WW3 by bombing Iran.
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0106-31.htm

Did you also notice that not a single Democrat has ever criticized Michael Moore, Lungdop? In fact they invite him to attend their functions.

Pat Robertson speaks for Pat Robertson, not for the Republican Party or conservatives and for you to state that he does otherwise is simply partisanship on your part.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
I noticed the white house and the republican party did not chastise PR when he advised them to assassinate Chavez.

I love this guilt by omission thing you constantly use Dop. I better see an 8-page post by you condeming every murder and rape in this country committed by someone with a liberal bent or I'll have to conclude that you're absolutely in favor of it.

I was doing some searches earlier today and came across a stunning discovery. Now, I had to go to several sites to piece this all together, but it goes something like this: Robertson gave Blitzer and Reed their first jobs and they are buddies with Abramoff who owns casino boats off Florida where Mohammed Atta and some of the 9/11 hijackers met Jeb Bush who gave them their final orders. So Robertson and Bush were conspiring with bin Laden the whole time!

Man, I love the internet.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
Now, how does that work? - considering every democrat in the country called for PR to apologize yet not one single republican joined in with anything other than defending him.



State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Tuesday that Robertson has the right of any private citizen to say whatever he wants, but added that the broadcaster's remarks "do not represent the views of the United States."

"His comments are inappropriate," he said. "Allegations that we are planning to take hostile action against the Venezuelan government are completely baseless and without fact."


Former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, who ran against Robertson for the GOP presidential nomination in 1988, called the comments "stupid" and "ludicrous" and suggested Robertson apologize "very quickly."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/23/robertson.chavez/

I think Dole qualifies as a Republican, don't you Dop?

Originally posted by Vilepagan
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/23/robertson.chavez/

I think Dole qualifies as a Republican, don't you Dop?

Two full days after the fact? Not too obvious he was taking one for the party.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
Two full days after the fact? Not to obvious he was taking one for the party.

Originally posted by LionelHutz
I love this guilt by omission thing you constantly use Dop. I better see an 8-page post by you condeming every murder and rape in this country committed by someone with a liberal bent or I'll have to conclude that you're absolutely in favor of it.
...and ten seconds after I post this, because of that last remark.

Originally posted by sedan
I was doing some searches earlier today and came across a stunning discovery. Now, I had to go to several sites to piece this all together, but it goes something like this: Robertson gave Blitzer and Reed their first jobs and they are buddies with Abramoff who owns casino boats off Florida where Mohammed Atta and some of the 9/11 hijackers met Jeb Bush who gave them their final orders. So Robertson and Bush were conspiring with bin Laden the whole time!

Man, I love the internet.

Good work sedan and you're not too far off ... you left out the part where Gus Boulis (SunCruz casino boats?) being murdered gangland style and there are 3 Gambino related hitmen in custody and last I heard, 2 of them are talking with possibly tieing Abramoff and his pals into this murder.

Little wonder everyone wants to distance themselves from Abramoff.

Originally posted by Frogger
Did you also notice that not a single Democrat has ever criticized Michael Moore, Lungdop? In fact they invite him to attend their functions.

Pat Robertson speaks for Pat Robertson, not for the Republican Party or conservatives and for you to state that he does otherwise is simply partisanship on your part.

The democrats, including me, are proud of Michael Moore. The republicans should show the same respect for their guy Robertson.

Pat Robertson gained more from the Katrina relief fund than anyone else ... all done with the blessings of Bush, his bestest buddy.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050919/blumenthal

Now -- just how is he not tied to the republican party?

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
Good work sedan and you're not too far off ... you left out the part where Gus Boulis (SunCruz casino boats?) being murdered gangland style and there are 3 Gambino related hitmen in custody and last I heard, 2 of them are talking with possibly tieing Abramoff and his pals into this murder.

Little wonder everyone wants to distance themselves from Abramoff.

While we're at it, why not talk about all the people around Clinton who mysteriously died, Lungdop.

You come across as even more partisan than Freethinker.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
Two full days after the fact? Not too obvious he was taking one for the party.

You mentioned nothing about any time criteria when you erroneously posted this:

not one single republican joined in with anything other than defending him.

I can't help but notice that when your error was pointed out you tried to change the subject to how long it took the Republicans to condemn Robertson's statement.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
You mentioned nothing about any time criteria when you erroneously posted this:


I can't help but notice that when your error was pointed out you tried to change the subject to how long it took the Republicans to condemn Robertson's statement.

There was no error in my post until 2 days had passed.

Do you not find it curious that an american openly calls for the assassination of a world leader and no one makes a rebuttal for 48 hours?

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
Do you not find it curious that an american openly calls for the assassination of a world leader and no one makes a rebuttal for 48 hours?

Not when the person making the statement is nuttier than a fruitcake.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
There was no error in my post until 2 days had passed.

Do you not find it curious that an american openly calls for the assassination of a world leader and no one makes a rebuttal for 48 hours?

Not in the least. As Lionel pointed out, Robertson's known for making off-the-wall remarks, and there's no reason for the government to comment on them at all IMO. Personally, I'm still waiting for Scott McClellan to publicly state that in fact yes, a jetliner full of people really did slam into the Pentagon. :D

While we're at it, why not talk about all the people around Clinton who mysteriously died, Lungdop.

You come across as even more partisan than Freethinker.

Why, oh why, does when somebody point out facts, the other side starts bitching about partisanship. Of course we're partisan. We have a standpoint and we aren't going to just hop over the fence so we look like we're playing nice for the Republicans.

For all the evil and corruption that happens in the Democratic Party, the Republican Party is five times worse. And for every spot of criminality that the righties can point to in the Democrat camp, we can point to five more in the Republican camp. This isn't just a shit-flinging fest, we are trying to point out that, hey, one party is better than the other one. And there is nothing unfair about pointing it out. Don't demand that Dop bring up Democratic corruption, that isn't what he does. It's not his job to dredge up debate points for you guys.

I'm sorry you right-wingers can't keep up with Dop. With the exception of his stance on 9/11, (even I don't realize why he keeps holding on to that one) I have yet to see any of you argue conclusively that he's wrong on any particular point. But I've seen plenty of whining. about, "Dop this, Dop that." Hah, maybe you guys should get rich too so you could have the free time to be able to research stuff as much as he does. But I'm increasingly coming to think that it is that very Republican ideology that keeps you from doing so. Well, except for Frogger, I think he's just too lazy to do any real debate work.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
The democrats, including me, are proud of Michael Moore.

Good to know you are spokesperson who gets to speak for half the country, does every democrat in America believe in the yeti too?

The republicans should show the same respect for their guy Robertson.

Why?

Originally posted by Napsterbater
For all the evil and corruption that happens in the Democratic Party, the Republican Party is five times worse. And for every spot of criminality that the righties can point to in the Democrat camp, we can point to five more in the Republican camp.

Evidence?

Don't demand that Dop bring up Democratic corruption, that isn't what he does. It's not his job to dredge up debate points for you guys.

::thread begins about corruption at the hands of some democrats::

Dop- "Bush first!" *links to an article*

No Napster, I'd say it's fair to do so.

Originally posted by Evakian
does every democrat in America believe in the yeti too?



As I have not heard any well-known Democrats deny the existence of the yeti, one must conclude that they believe in its existence.

Thank you for the support Napsterbater.

I find it sad how the conservatives have to gang up on me (and other lefties) to try and drown out the sounds of truth. If I hit a sore spot like the Pat Robertson issue, they immediately come at me, the messenger with all their Yeti remarks, their pantagon remarks and other nonsense and of course, their premier fall-back argument - Clinton

Just once, I'd like to see the right defend their point straight up with facts and research. Chances are, it won't happen. It will just be more of the same as we're currently witnessing on the Abramoff threads ... the dems took Abramoff money and when I challenge them to show me the transactions, they don't because they can't. Instead, they just shout their talking point louder and louder and en masse hoping to overwhelm the opposition (me) and create reality through perception based on their fantasies.

Couple of other things ...

I'm not rich. In my neighborhood, I'm no more than an average person in terms of wealth. I live on social security fer crissakes... how does that make me rich? After all, isn't it a right wing talking point that a person on social security is barely making it and had the money been in the market it would be much better? ROTF ... If I had my money in the market I'd be living in a cardboard box under the 7th ave bridge and eating out of garbage cans.

I have time to research my posts because I'm retired, not because I have a fat wallet.

And I don't care if anyone believes in the Yeti nor do I care if anyone thinks I'm crazy for having interest in the Yeti. I've explained before that the Migou (Yeti) is a major study point in my religion and I leave it at that as to why I have interest in a subject most people don't care about. Of course, the same people that knock my beliefs, call me a racist and anti-semitic if I dare mention you know who.

With regards to 9/11 -- that is an automatic trigger point. Guaranteed to make conservative heads blow up. They have a hard time dealing with the fact 9/11 happened on Bush's watch and they have a very black and white view of the circumstances surrounding the attacks.

The view of the right says it was caused by Al-QUida who they have yet to identify (show me one or at least what one looks like) and those AQ's were trained by Osama Bin Laden, that is until we couldn't capture him and the right needed a new boogeyman.

Then Saddam became the perpetrator of 9/11 and his country Iraq, hosted Al-Quida and trained them. All that in the face of every intel agency in the world denouncing it as truth.

Shoot -- the right didn't even want to investigat 9/11 and only did so under severe pressure and then Bush only allowed it if he could pick the panel. ROTFL big time on that one.

That's why I use 9/11 -- it scares the pants off the right knowing someday the truth will come out.

Good to know you are spokesperson who gets to speak for half the country, does every democrat in America believe in the yeti too?

Evakian won't believe anything unless it's cross-linked three times to six different newspapers, and put in the Britannica as well.

Why don't you take something at face value for once? It's not going to kill you. I'm not saying you have to agree with it, just incorporate it into your argument somehow instead of bitching. Need advice on how to do that? Take a gander at some of my posts.

Evidence?

Start with all of Dop's posts. He's more than willing to trot out link after link, not that you are willing to listen, even if they prove conclusive. Quit clamoring for evidence you won't listen to anyway.

Originally posted by Vilepagan
I'm still waiting for Scott McClellan to publicly state that in fact yes, a jetliner full of people really did slam into the Pentagon. :D

Nah - Scotty's gonna be too busy helping his mom win that governor's seat in Texas.

http://scoop.epluribusmedia.org/story/2006/1/3/111440/3031

Notice the difference in severity of criticism:

Calling for the assassination of a foreign leader:
"His comments are inappropriate," he said. "Allegations that we are planning to take hostile action against the Venezuelan government are completely baseless and without fact."

Stupidly interpreting events that have taken place:
"Those comments are wholly inappropriate and offensive and really don't have a place in this or any other debate," presidential spokesman Trent Duffy said..."


Clinton had people murdered too. However it is extremely irrelevant to this discussion.

On the Abramoff thing. Bush had many many visits with him when he first came to office. Thats a 1 degree of seperation between Bush and Atta.

In my neighborhood, I'm no more than an average person in terms of wealth.

I agree with the above before this quote, but this kinda throws me a little. Why can't I find a rich person who accepts the fact that he is rich? It's almost like it's a taboo or something. Didn't I read somewhere that the property values in the area you live in are in the millions? Being wealthy isn't determined by what your neighbors have; they're just as wealthy as you are, then. Being able to subsist on Social Security is only more testament to your wealth. Many people wouldn't be able to do so, and would have to get jobs to supplement that. Moreover, that also speaks to modest tastes, not amount of wealth. One can be very wealthy and drive a two-year old car, and buy their own groceries at the local grocery store.

From everything Frogger posts I gather that he's pretty wealthy too, to be able to afford his upper-class tastes even in retirement. But I doubt he would admit it.

Israel just nixed a $50 million theme park deal with Robertson.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10802750/

LMAO!

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
I've explained before that the Migou (Yeti) is a major study point in my religion and I leave it at that as to why I have interest in a subject most people don't care about.
ROTFFLMFAO!!!

Priceless. Dop, you're awesome! I challenge any of you to find entertainment like THIS for free. Go ahead, I dare you...

Originally posted by Napsterbater
Why can't I find a rich person who accepts the fact that he is rich?
I guess that would entirely depend on what your perception of "rich" is? What's rich to you? Owning a car? Eating three squares a day?

Oh, boy, I can't wait for this one...

Point taken NB but keep in mind that no one ever gave me anything ... I earned every steenkin' penny of whatever I have.

Somehow I suspect Frogger did the same.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
I find it sad how the conservatives have to gang up on me (and other lefties) to try and drown out the sounds of truth. If I hit a sore spot like the Pat Robertson issue, they immediately come at me, the messenger with all their Yeti remarks, their pantagon remarks and other nonsense and of course, their premier fall-back argument -Clinton

I may be wrong, but you probably consider me in that group. I am sorry you feel I and others are coming after you, sometimes you make questionable statements and so that warrants a question. I am not affected by attacks at Pat Robertson, do so at your leisure, I do not wish to attack the idea of the Yeti--that comment was merely a prodding for entertainment reasons. I also, to my knowledge, do not find myself using the "Clinton fall-back argument", and ponder the use of labeling someone a 'conservative' because they question you on a claim.

Just once, I'd like to see the right defend their point straight up with facts and research. Chances are, it won't happen. It will just be more of the same as we're currently witnessing on the Abramoff threads ...the dems took Abramoff money and when I challenge them to show me the transactions

I too would like to read over the transactions as evidence, but why not produce evidence of the republicans doing so as well Dop, why the double standard?

they don't because they can't.

Or perhaps they like to use your tactic and evade questions and fail to offer proof with their assertions, perhaps out of laziness.

And I don't care if anyone believes in the Yeti nor do I care if anyone thinks I'm crazy for having interest in the Yeti. I've explained before that the Migou (Yeti) is a major study point in my religion and I leave it at that as to why I have interest in a subject most people don't care about.

Interesting Dop, may I ask what religion you refer to? :)

Of course, the same people that knock my beliefs, call me a racist and anti-semitic if I dare mention you know who.

I shall go on the notion that you mean Brooks, has he attacked your faith, and directly called you a racist or anti-semite before?

Originally posted by Napsterbater
Evakian won't believe anything unless it's cross-linked three times to six different newspapers, and put in the Britannica as well.

Highly untrue.

Also,

For all the evil and corruption that happens in the Democratic Party, the Republican Party is five times worse. And for every spot of criminality that the righties can point to in the Democrat camp, we can point to five more in the Republican camp.

Is a groundless claim, without evidence it falls flat.

Why don't you take something at face value for once?

I will when logic of the argument needn't be called into question. Otherwise, things need evidence in order to be factual.

It's not going to kill you. I'm not saying you have to agree with it, just incorporate it into your argument somehow instead of bitching.

Asking questions is "bitching"? And I shall debate the way I choose.

Need advice on how to do that? Take a gander at some of my posts.

I do not see that present in your posts, where does this come from?

Start with all of Dop's posts. He's more than willing to trot out link after link, not that you are willing to listen, even if they prove conclusive. Quit clamoring for evidence you won't listen to anyway.

Who said I won't listen? You?
I do believe I have stated "I will always listen to other viewpoints", specifically at Dop in that situation because he incited the comment. I read the articles posted here, sometimes I ask questions to spur debate, other times I add input into the discussion, and do my best to always keep an open mind to everything and everyone. Why do you make that claim when it is blatantly false?

Originally posted by Evakian
I am sorry you feel I and others are coming after you, sometimes you make questionable statements and so that warrants a question.

It's a political forum and I expect people to come at me but they could bring something to the table to defend their positions and not just throw personal attacks.

I too would like to read over the transactions as evidence, but why not produce evidence of the republicans doing so as well Dop, why the double standard?

Here's one for starters and there plenty more out there ...

http://www.newsmeat.com/washington_political_donations/Jack_Abramoff.php

Interesting Dop, may I ask what religion you refer to? :)

I am Bon - sometimes referred to as Bon Po or Bonpo.

If you care to read some of my short stories (derived from journals of life experiences) ...

Here's one with religious connotations ...

http://members.cox.net/migoucave/htdocs/tibet.html

Here's one with a lighter side ...

http://members.cox.net/migoucave/htdocs/fangue.html

These links are at a temporary home due to my web site undergoing some serious construction.

I shall go on the notion that you mean Brooks, has he attacked your faith, and directly called you a racist or anti-semite before?

No one, especially Brooks, has intentionally attacked my faith. OTOH, my feet are held to the fire on being sensitive to other's religions but it seems to be a one-way street.

Originally posted by Lungdop Philing
I am Bon - sometimes referred to as Bon Po or Bonpo.

If you care to read some of my short stories (derived from journals of life experiences) ...

Here's one with religious connotations ...

http://members.cox.net/love795/htdocs/tibet.html

Here's one with a lighter side ...

http://members.cox.net/love795/htdocs/fangue.html

These links are at a temporary home due to my web site undergoing some serious construction.

Thanks for the treat Dop :)

Har har har....

http://web.morons.org/article.jsp?sectionid=6&id=6714

All i have to say about Pat Robertson is this...

How in the HELL would he know what God thinks????

He's an idiot.. plain and simple, well no... he IS an idiot, but he is demented.....

thats funny I often think the same thing about Bush...maybe that why they were friends...