Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
The Cannon of Christianity: Pat Robertson Calls for the Assassination of Hugo Chavez
Christian televangelist Pat Robertson set off an international firestorm this week when he called for the assassination of Venezuela's democratically-elected president Hugo Chavez. We speak with journalist and author Chris Hedges and attorney Michal Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights.
Christian televangelist Pat Robertson set off an international firestorm this week when he called for the assassination of Venezuela's democratically-elected president Hugo Chavez. Robertson made the comment on his TV program "The 700 Club."
* Pat Robertson, Christian Broadcasting Network, speaking on "The 700 Club."
Robertson, who is 75, ran for president as a Republican in 1988 (nineteen ninety eight.) He has often used his show and the political advocacy group he founded, the Christian Coalition, to support President Bush. According to his web site, the TV show, "The 700 Club" has an audience of about one million people. At a news conference Tuesday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was questioned about Roberton's comments.
* Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, news conference, August 23, 2005.
Robertson's comments were also denounced by the State Department which called them "inappropriate," but the White House has remained silent despite repeated calls for repudiation.
Meanwhile, the Rev. Jesse Jackson called for the Federal Communications Commission to investigate Robertson's comments and the watchdog group, Media Matters for America, sent a letter urging the ABC Family network to stop carrying his show. While some of Robertson's allies distanced themselves from his comments, other conservative Christian organizations were not so forthcoming. The president of the National Association of Evangelicals, the Reverend Ted Haggard, was questioned on CNN yesterday afternoon by host Kyra Phillips.
* Rev. Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, interviewed on CNN, August 23, 2005.
Meanwhile, Robertson's comments have set off an international firestorm. In Havana, Cuban President Fidel Castro criticized Robertson's comments saying, "I think only God can punish crimes of such magnitude." Meanwhile, Venezuela's ambassador to Washington, Bernardo Alvarez, said Bush needs to guarantee Chavez's safety at next month's United Nations meeting in New York.
* Bernardo Alvarez, Venezuelan ambassador to U.S., news conference, August 23, 2005.
In Caracas, Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel said Venezuela was studying its legal options in response to the comments. He said, "It's huge hypocrisy to maintain this discourse against terrorism and at the same time, in the heart of that country, there are entirely terrorist statements like those."
Chavez has often accused the United States of plotting his overthrow or assassination. He survived a short-lived coup in 2002.
US involvement? Over the years, tens of millions of dollars in U.S. government money has been given to Venezuelan opposition groups through the National Endowment for Democracy. Last August, Chavez survived a referendum to remove him from power through a recall election. Venezuela is the world's fifth largest oil exporting country and a major supplier to the United States.
* Chris Hedges, journalist and author. He was a foreign correspondent for The New York Times and is currently a senior fellow at the Nation Institute. He is author of "War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning" and "Losing Moses on the Freeway." He has a Masters degree in theology from Harvard University. He is currently writing a book on the Christian Right.
* Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights.
LISTEN ONLINE
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/24/1343225
* Pat Robertson, Christian Broadcasting Network, speaking on "The 700 Club."
Robertson, who is 75, ran for president as a Republican in 1988 (nineteen ninety eight.) He has often used his show and the political advocacy group he founded, the Christian Coalition, to support President Bush. According to his web site, the TV show, "The 700 Club" has an audience of about one million people. At a news conference Tuesday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was questioned about Roberton's comments.
* Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, news conference, August 23, 2005.
Robertson's comments were also denounced by the State Department which called them "inappropriate," but the White House has remained silent despite repeated calls for repudiation.
Meanwhile, the Rev. Jesse Jackson called for the Federal Communications Commission to investigate Robertson's comments and the watchdog group, Media Matters for America, sent a letter urging the ABC Family network to stop carrying his show. While some of Robertson's allies distanced themselves from his comments, other conservative Christian organizations were not so forthcoming. The president of the National Association of Evangelicals, the Reverend Ted Haggard, was questioned on CNN yesterday afternoon by host Kyra Phillips.
* Rev. Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, interviewed on CNN, August 23, 2005.
Meanwhile, Robertson's comments have set off an international firestorm. In Havana, Cuban President Fidel Castro criticized Robertson's comments saying, "I think only God can punish crimes of such magnitude." Meanwhile, Venezuela's ambassador to Washington, Bernardo Alvarez, said Bush needs to guarantee Chavez's safety at next month's United Nations meeting in New York.
* Bernardo Alvarez, Venezuelan ambassador to U.S., news conference, August 23, 2005.
In Caracas, Vice President Jose Vicente Rangel said Venezuela was studying its legal options in response to the comments. He said, "It's huge hypocrisy to maintain this discourse against terrorism and at the same time, in the heart of that country, there are entirely terrorist statements like those."
Chavez has often accused the United States of plotting his overthrow or assassination. He survived a short-lived coup in 2002.
US involvement? Over the years, tens of millions of dollars in U.S. government money has been given to Venezuelan opposition groups through the National Endowment for Democracy. Last August, Chavez survived a referendum to remove him from power through a recall election. Venezuela is the world's fifth largest oil exporting country and a major supplier to the United States.
* Chris Hedges, journalist and author. He was a foreign correspondent for The New York Times and is currently a senior fellow at the Nation Institute. He is author of "War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning" and "Losing Moses on the Freeway." He has a Masters degree in theology from Harvard University. He is currently writing a book on the Christian Right.
* Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights.
LISTEN ONLINE
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/24/1343225
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
The "assassinate Hugo Chavez" comment is just the latest facet in Pat Robertson's pattern of racism and support of military occupation and apartheid violence..
When South African indigenous people were struggling under the yoke of an apartheid government and dying in the diamond mines, "good Christian tele-vangelist" Pat Robertson was an outspoken supporter of South Africa's apartheid regime..
"Like many other conservative Christians, Robertson had a soft spot for apartheid in South Africa. At the height of the apartheid era, he was one of its chief apologists in Christian circles. "I've been to South Africa," he said. "I know we don't like apartheid, but the blacks in South Africa, in Soweto, don't have it all that bad." During the 18th March, 1992 screening of his 700 Club, he said, "Again, I think 'one man one vote,' just unrestricted democracy, would not be wise. There needs to be some kind of protection for the minority which the white people represent now, a minority, and they need and have a right to demand a protection of their rights." "
The diamond mine deals brokered by Pat Robertson were not limited to South Africa, his "good Christian" hands were meddling beneath the ground of Zaire via slavery also..
"Anyway, Mobutu was making 300 million a year from diamond trading. After Britain, France and the US all began to sanction Zaire over its appalling human rights record, Mobutu found Robertson willing to help by providing a cloak of respectability to the whole venture. Robertson began a diamond mining operation with Mobutu, later expanding to include gold exploration and hardwood logging.
Interestingly, the diamond mining equipment is reported to have been flown around Africa by planes bought by Pat’s ‘Operation Blessing’ charity. The Virginia Pilot reported in 1996 that two pilots hired by the charity to fly “humanitarian aid” into Zaire in 1994, had instead been used almost exclusively to shuttle in materials for Robertson’s diamond mining operations. The chief pilot, Robert Hinkle, claimed that in all the time he flew for Operation Blessing, only one or two of the more than forty flights were actually for humanitarian purposes. The rest were carrying mining equipment.
My first impression when I took the job was that we'd be called Operation Blessing and we'd be doing humanitarian work. We got over there and 'Operation Blessing' was painted on the tails of the airplanes, but we were doing no humanitarian relief at all. We were just supplying the miners and flying the dredges from Kinshasa out to Tshikapa."
above info from "Here's to you Dr. Robertson";
http://www.atrueword.com/index.php/article/view/42/1/2
other info;
http://www.keithboykin.com/arch/000789.html
Here's more info about Robertson's profit from Zaire's blood diamonds during the CIA supported Mobutu regime..
"Robertson, the former U.S. presidential candidate, has shown that he is not the least bit uneasy with utilizing Mobutu's personal fleet of planes and yachts, which were purchased off the backs of Zaire's oppressed citizens. Dr. Makau Mutua, projects director of the Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School, in the February 27, 1995 issue of TIME magazine observed that "Robertson is Mobutu's biggest American catch."
When presented with more of the facts surrounding ADC, one is forced question the nature of Robertson's relationship with such a dictator. Should a "good Christian" profit from diamonds and lumber mined by the functional equivalent of slave labor? While other Christian relief programs donate aid to Zaire via private organizations to avoid any connection with Mobutu's corrupt government, Robertson rushes forth with open arms towards Mobutu.
On February 16, 1992, Zairian Protestants and Catholics held a demonstration asking for reform. Mobutu's troops opened fire on the demonstrators. Despite the bloody massacre that followed, coupled with criticism by the U.S. State Department, Pat Robertson was among the first in line to wine and dine with Mobutu in Zaire.
Perhaps Robertson's financial gains are enough for him to ignore any humanitarian pleas for reform in Zaire. Not only does Robertson profit handsomely off of his tidy diamond-mining operation, but Mobutu also makes his own, more than satisfactory income, through his country's $300 million-a-year mineral trade. Although Robertson has supported a number of dubious causes, his relationship with a character like Mobutu is one that may lead to more questions than Robertson is willing to answer. The love (of money) relationship between Robertson and Mobutu may leave Robertson's associates feeling a bit more than uncomfortable."
rest of article @;
"Diamonds are Pats Best Friend"
http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/pat_quotes/diamonds.html
"Another affiliate of Anglo-American, De Beers, controls 85% of the international diamond market, through mines in South Africa and other countries in the region. De Beers ships many of its diamonds to the Israeli settler state, which is the world's largest diamond cutter and polisher."
"The popular support for apartheid is being led by Jerry Falwell on behalf of Reagan. Falwell is not constrained by the diplomatic niceties of political office and so he does not even have to give lip-service to opposition to the apartheid regime. He also makes false or distorted statements about the South African situation. After his recent trip to South Africa, he attacked Tutu as a phony and asserted that Blacks in South Africa opposed divestment. Both were obvious distortions: Tutu does have a following and is even respected by those who oppose his line; and a survey by a reputable polling organization indicated that Blacks overwhelmingly (75%) support divestment. Also, less than 1% of the Black work force is employed by U.S. corporations. Despite these realities, Falwell continues to promote his lies and to claim ties to the Black churches in South Africa.
Using these distortions combined with anti-communism, Falwell tries to rally mass support for apartheid and raise money. He pledged to raise one million dollars to stop the divestment forces and to support the Botha government. His historical ability to do this is enhanced by his creation of the "non-religious" Liberty Foundation for his reactionary political activities."
above paragraph quotes from;
"The Revolution in South Africa:
An Analysis
A Tribute to Soweto Youth, 1976-1986"
found at;
http://www.mltranslations.org/SouthAfrica/SApamphl.htm
other info;
Diamond mines in South Africa;
http://www.nigeriansinamerica.com/
http://www.nigeriansinamerica.com/articles.php?articleId=255
Demoncraps not off the hook either, didn't think we're gonna play lesser evilism this late in the game ,eh?
CA Senator Diane Feinstein's unwavering support of Zionist Israel, also Zionist funding source info;
http://www.zpub.com/un/un-df.html
What is Christian Zionism's role in the military funding of apartheid Israel?
Challenging Chrisitan Zionism;
http://www.christianzionism.org/
previous IMC article about Pat Robertson;
http://beirut.indymedia.org/ar/2005/04/2449.shtml
When South African indigenous people were struggling under the yoke of an apartheid government and dying in the diamond mines, "good Christian tele-vangelist" Pat Robertson was an outspoken supporter of South Africa's apartheid regime..
"Like many other conservative Christians, Robertson had a soft spot for apartheid in South Africa. At the height of the apartheid era, he was one of its chief apologists in Christian circles. "I've been to South Africa," he said. "I know we don't like apartheid, but the blacks in South Africa, in Soweto, don't have it all that bad." During the 18th March, 1992 screening of his 700 Club, he said, "Again, I think 'one man one vote,' just unrestricted democracy, would not be wise. There needs to be some kind of protection for the minority which the white people represent now, a minority, and they need and have a right to demand a protection of their rights." "
The diamond mine deals brokered by Pat Robertson were not limited to South Africa, his "good Christian" hands were meddling beneath the ground of Zaire via slavery also..
"Anyway, Mobutu was making 300 million a year from diamond trading. After Britain, France and the US all began to sanction Zaire over its appalling human rights record, Mobutu found Robertson willing to help by providing a cloak of respectability to the whole venture. Robertson began a diamond mining operation with Mobutu, later expanding to include gold exploration and hardwood logging.
Interestingly, the diamond mining equipment is reported to have been flown around Africa by planes bought by Pat’s ‘Operation Blessing’ charity. The Virginia Pilot reported in 1996 that two pilots hired by the charity to fly “humanitarian aid” into Zaire in 1994, had instead been used almost exclusively to shuttle in materials for Robertson’s diamond mining operations. The chief pilot, Robert Hinkle, claimed that in all the time he flew for Operation Blessing, only one or two of the more than forty flights were actually for humanitarian purposes. The rest were carrying mining equipment.
My first impression when I took the job was that we'd be called Operation Blessing and we'd be doing humanitarian work. We got over there and 'Operation Blessing' was painted on the tails of the airplanes, but we were doing no humanitarian relief at all. We were just supplying the miners and flying the dredges from Kinshasa out to Tshikapa."
above info from "Here's to you Dr. Robertson";
http://www.atrueword.com/index.php/article/view/42/1/2
other info;
http://www.keithboykin.com/arch/000789.html
Here's more info about Robertson's profit from Zaire's blood diamonds during the CIA supported Mobutu regime..
"Robertson, the former U.S. presidential candidate, has shown that he is not the least bit uneasy with utilizing Mobutu's personal fleet of planes and yachts, which were purchased off the backs of Zaire's oppressed citizens. Dr. Makau Mutua, projects director of the Human Rights Program at Harvard Law School, in the February 27, 1995 issue of TIME magazine observed that "Robertson is Mobutu's biggest American catch."
When presented with more of the facts surrounding ADC, one is forced question the nature of Robertson's relationship with such a dictator. Should a "good Christian" profit from diamonds and lumber mined by the functional equivalent of slave labor? While other Christian relief programs donate aid to Zaire via private organizations to avoid any connection with Mobutu's corrupt government, Robertson rushes forth with open arms towards Mobutu.
On February 16, 1992, Zairian Protestants and Catholics held a demonstration asking for reform. Mobutu's troops opened fire on the demonstrators. Despite the bloody massacre that followed, coupled with criticism by the U.S. State Department, Pat Robertson was among the first in line to wine and dine with Mobutu in Zaire.
Perhaps Robertson's financial gains are enough for him to ignore any humanitarian pleas for reform in Zaire. Not only does Robertson profit handsomely off of his tidy diamond-mining operation, but Mobutu also makes his own, more than satisfactory income, through his country's $300 million-a-year mineral trade. Although Robertson has supported a number of dubious causes, his relationship with a character like Mobutu is one that may lead to more questions than Robertson is willing to answer. The love (of money) relationship between Robertson and Mobutu may leave Robertson's associates feeling a bit more than uncomfortable."
rest of article @;
"Diamonds are Pats Best Friend"
http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/pat_quotes/diamonds.html
"Another affiliate of Anglo-American, De Beers, controls 85% of the international diamond market, through mines in South Africa and other countries in the region. De Beers ships many of its diamonds to the Israeli settler state, which is the world's largest diamond cutter and polisher."
"The popular support for apartheid is being led by Jerry Falwell on behalf of Reagan. Falwell is not constrained by the diplomatic niceties of political office and so he does not even have to give lip-service to opposition to the apartheid regime. He also makes false or distorted statements about the South African situation. After his recent trip to South Africa, he attacked Tutu as a phony and asserted that Blacks in South Africa opposed divestment. Both were obvious distortions: Tutu does have a following and is even respected by those who oppose his line; and a survey by a reputable polling organization indicated that Blacks overwhelmingly (75%) support divestment. Also, less than 1% of the Black work force is employed by U.S. corporations. Despite these realities, Falwell continues to promote his lies and to claim ties to the Black churches in South Africa.
Using these distortions combined with anti-communism, Falwell tries to rally mass support for apartheid and raise money. He pledged to raise one million dollars to stop the divestment forces and to support the Botha government. His historical ability to do this is enhanced by his creation of the "non-religious" Liberty Foundation for his reactionary political activities."
above paragraph quotes from;
"The Revolution in South Africa:
An Analysis
A Tribute to Soweto Youth, 1976-1986"
found at;
http://www.mltranslations.org/SouthAfrica/SApamphl.htm
other info;
Diamond mines in South Africa;
http://www.nigeriansinamerica.com/
http://www.nigeriansinamerica.com/articles.php?articleId=255
Demoncraps not off the hook either, didn't think we're gonna play lesser evilism this late in the game ,eh?
CA Senator Diane Feinstein's unwavering support of Zionist Israel, also Zionist funding source info;
http://www.zpub.com/un/un-df.html
What is Christian Zionism's role in the military funding of apartheid Israel?
Challenging Chrisitan Zionism;
http://www.christianzionism.org/
previous IMC article about Pat Robertson;
http://beirut.indymedia.org/ar/2005/04/2449.shtml
THE call by the founder of the Christian Coalition and a staunch backer of the Bush White House, that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez be assassinated deserves to be condemned by all right-thinking people. Television personality Pat Robertson, an icon of the politically powerful religious right in America, expressed this shocking view during a live TV broadcast.
The Bush administration has distanced itself from the evangelist’s outburst, but more in sorrow than anger. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld for instance, having said that political assassination was illegal, added: “Private citizens say all kinds of things, all of the time”, as if the words of such a prominent and influential figure as Robertson were of really no consequence.
In actual fact, it may well be that Robertson’s call for the murder of the left-wing Venezuelan president, as being a cheaper option than “another $ 200billion war” to oust another international opponent, is in itself illegal. Certainly under draft measures published yesterday by the British government to clamp down on foreigners who incited terrorism or religious or racial hatred, Robertson is likely to be put on the next plane back to America, should he try to visit the UK.
Calling for the assassination of anyone, let alone the head of a sovereign state, is an act of terrorism. What is the difference between Zarqawi or people like him demanding the murder of leaders who oppose them and a high-profile broadcaster whose message is beamed into millions of US homes, calling for the murder of Chavez? The answer is none. None at all.
Yet is it plausible that any legal action will be taken against Robertson? The US Department of Justice is most unlikely to make any initial move, if for no better reason than that the Robertson world view, where the bad guys should be taken out at the least cost to the US tax payer, lies at the heart of the political support that underpins this president. Maybe, if the man cannot be persuaded to retract his murderous views, Robertson will become subject to an officially inspired whispering campaign about his declining mental powers. In truth however it will not be his aberrant opinions that will be in dispute, but his lack of judgment in expressing them on prime time TV.
Robertson’s “go get ‘em” approach is driven by the same blinkered understanding that has so tragically informed, or rather misinformed the US policies and actions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Few Americans have ever had any political or even moral qualms about the invasions. Even now the anti-war movement is most upset about the cost in US blood and treasure, not an illegal and immoral war.
For most American voters, terrorism is what foreigners do. President Bush wears the tin star and leads the posse that will eventually root them all out. No way could any loyal, red-blooded American ever be considered a terrorist himself. Yet in calling for Venezuela’s President Chavez to be murdered, that is precisely what Pat Robertson made himself.
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=69003&d=25&m=8&y=2005
The Bush administration has distanced itself from the evangelist’s outburst, but more in sorrow than anger. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld for instance, having said that political assassination was illegal, added: “Private citizens say all kinds of things, all of the time”, as if the words of such a prominent and influential figure as Robertson were of really no consequence.
In actual fact, it may well be that Robertson’s call for the murder of the left-wing Venezuelan president, as being a cheaper option than “another $ 200billion war” to oust another international opponent, is in itself illegal. Certainly under draft measures published yesterday by the British government to clamp down on foreigners who incited terrorism or religious or racial hatred, Robertson is likely to be put on the next plane back to America, should he try to visit the UK.
Calling for the assassination of anyone, let alone the head of a sovereign state, is an act of terrorism. What is the difference between Zarqawi or people like him demanding the murder of leaders who oppose them and a high-profile broadcaster whose message is beamed into millions of US homes, calling for the murder of Chavez? The answer is none. None at all.
Yet is it plausible that any legal action will be taken against Robertson? The US Department of Justice is most unlikely to make any initial move, if for no better reason than that the Robertson world view, where the bad guys should be taken out at the least cost to the US tax payer, lies at the heart of the political support that underpins this president. Maybe, if the man cannot be persuaded to retract his murderous views, Robertson will become subject to an officially inspired whispering campaign about his declining mental powers. In truth however it will not be his aberrant opinions that will be in dispute, but his lack of judgment in expressing them on prime time TV.
Robertson’s “go get ‘em” approach is driven by the same blinkered understanding that has so tragically informed, or rather misinformed the US policies and actions in Afghanistan and Iraq. Few Americans have ever had any political or even moral qualms about the invasions. Even now the anti-war movement is most upset about the cost in US blood and treasure, not an illegal and immoral war.
For most American voters, terrorism is what foreigners do. President Bush wears the tin star and leads the posse that will eventually root them all out. No way could any loyal, red-blooded American ever be considered a terrorist himself. Yet in calling for Venezuela’s President Chavez to be murdered, that is precisely what Pat Robertson made himself.
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=69003&d=25&m=8&y=2005
Hugo Chavez and the men who claim to speak for Jesus
Update: Hardest media job in the world: Pat Robertson's spokesperson. After first denying that he had called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (which he clearly did), evangelical leader and former Republican presidential candidate (he won the Iowa primary in 1988) issued an apology today. A written statement said, "Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement." Bill Maher put it best on MSNBC's Scarborough Country last night, saying he was hard-pressed to see the difference between a urine-soaked street preacher with a bullhorn babbling about the apocalypse and the multi-millionaire head of the Christian Broadcasting Network. Here Ron Jacobs explores the dangerous distortion of Jesus' message in another wing of Christianity, the Catholic cult Opus Dei:
You know, when I was growing up as a Catholic, I was given many differing views of Jesus Christ. Virtually all of them were speculative, of course, and as I grew older, I became aware that most of them were based on the teacher's particular political and cultural persuasion. The Pallotinian nuns that taught me in the first and second grades were always telling us horror stories about the communists in the Soviet Union and China and had us pray for the souls of their children every morning. The Jesuits I knew in high school provided me and my fellow catechism students with a different view of Jesus. Indeed, for most of these men Jesus was a revolutionary. How much of his revolution was spiritual and how much was social depended on their level of social and political involvement. Being a very political person, I saw Jesus as a revolutionary communist with a small "c." Of course, there were a number of men with Roman collars at the time who were taking this perception and turning it into the basis for a social movement in many parts of the world, especially in Latin America. Many of them were Jesuits.
It is this tradition that Hugo Chavez of Venezuela recalls in his speeches and social programs. It is also this tradition, known today as liberation theology that the late pope John Paul II attacked within months of his appointment in 1978. John Paul II's opposition to this perception of Jesus and his works were also part of the reason for the demotion of the Jesuit order as the pope's protectors and the ascension of the right wing Catholic organization Opus Dei into that role. The new pope is even less sympathetic to this train of thought. The underlying reason for this vehement opposition to liberation theology among the Catholic hierarchy stems from its alliances with nonreligious leftists and its attacks on the Church's role as part of the oppressive structure in the world of the peasantry. Nowhere is this role greater than it is in Latin America.
Ever since Chavez began his popular upheaval in Venezuela he has been under attack by the Catholic hierarchy in that country. In fact, members of Opus Dei were involved in the failed coup of 2000 and have been instrumental in the CIA-funded opposition movement since the coup, just as they were intimately involved in the murderous CIA-sponsored coup in September 1973 in Chile. Last month, Bishop Baltazar Porras, president of the Venezuelan bishops' conference, said proponents of radical liberation theology are using it to weaken and divide the Church. "This is part of a plan to debilitate the Church," Porras told The Associated Press in an interview last week. He cited a recent forum in which the Church was accused of turning her back on the poor, where Chavez garners most of his political support. "This is a new program led by a group of theologians like the ones in the times of the Sandinista rule in Nicaragua with the same arguments," said Porras. "The argument is fundamentally anti-Catholic, anti-hierarchy." (Catholic World New, 8/15/2005) It is quite interesting to note Porras equating being anti-hierarchy with being anti-Catholic. I wonder how the Jesus who threw the moneychangers out of the temple and challenged the Scribes and the Pharisees would feel about that equation.
Now, in addition to having the Catholic hierarchy opposed to him, Mr. Chavez has incurred the wrath of some in the evangelical community. Given the generally political conservatism of much of this community, this is not surprising. What is surprising, however, is the vehemence of this wrath. Pat Robertson, former US presidential candidate and head of the multimillion-dollar Christian Broadcast Network, called for Chavez's assassination in a broadcast Monday night. Calling assassination " a whole lot cheaper than starting a war" Robertson went on to say that if Chavez were killed by US covert operatives he didn't "think any oil shipments will stop."
Of course, for those who keep their religion close to their heart or use it only when necessary to cynically convince the public of the rightness of their actions, the comments regarding oil must strike a chord. After all, that's the underlying reason for Washington's (and the old guard in Venezuela) opposition to Chavez in the first place. Not only is he using Venezuelan oil revenues to help the perennially poor in Venezuela, he is also selling it to Cuba at cut rates and making deals with China, much to the chagrin of Washington. Chavez and his supporters understand this. In addition, they also understand the Jesus who inspired Father Gutierrez and his liberation theology. That was the Jesus who said: "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven."
Unfortunately, if Mr. Robertson and many others in Washington, Caracas and the Vatican have their way, Hugo Chavez may get his chance to enter that kingdom well before they do. Although I still like to think that if there is a heaven, Mr. Robertson and his ilk will be denied admission.
---
Ron Jacobs is author of The Way the Wind Blew: A history of the Weather Underground, which is just republished by Verso. Jacobs’ essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch’s new collection on music, art and sex, Serpents in the Garden. He can be reached at: ron05401 [at] yahoo.com
http://www.trinicenter.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1127
Update: Hardest media job in the world: Pat Robertson's spokesperson. After first denying that he had called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez (which he clearly did), evangelical leader and former Republican presidential candidate (he won the Iowa primary in 1988) issued an apology today. A written statement said, "Is it right to call for assassination? No, and I apologize for that statement." Bill Maher put it best on MSNBC's Scarborough Country last night, saying he was hard-pressed to see the difference between a urine-soaked street preacher with a bullhorn babbling about the apocalypse and the multi-millionaire head of the Christian Broadcasting Network. Here Ron Jacobs explores the dangerous distortion of Jesus' message in another wing of Christianity, the Catholic cult Opus Dei:
You know, when I was growing up as a Catholic, I was given many differing views of Jesus Christ. Virtually all of them were speculative, of course, and as I grew older, I became aware that most of them were based on the teacher's particular political and cultural persuasion. The Pallotinian nuns that taught me in the first and second grades were always telling us horror stories about the communists in the Soviet Union and China and had us pray for the souls of their children every morning. The Jesuits I knew in high school provided me and my fellow catechism students with a different view of Jesus. Indeed, for most of these men Jesus was a revolutionary. How much of his revolution was spiritual and how much was social depended on their level of social and political involvement. Being a very political person, I saw Jesus as a revolutionary communist with a small "c." Of course, there were a number of men with Roman collars at the time who were taking this perception and turning it into the basis for a social movement in many parts of the world, especially in Latin America. Many of them were Jesuits.
It is this tradition that Hugo Chavez of Venezuela recalls in his speeches and social programs. It is also this tradition, known today as liberation theology that the late pope John Paul II attacked within months of his appointment in 1978. John Paul II's opposition to this perception of Jesus and his works were also part of the reason for the demotion of the Jesuit order as the pope's protectors and the ascension of the right wing Catholic organization Opus Dei into that role. The new pope is even less sympathetic to this train of thought. The underlying reason for this vehement opposition to liberation theology among the Catholic hierarchy stems from its alliances with nonreligious leftists and its attacks on the Church's role as part of the oppressive structure in the world of the peasantry. Nowhere is this role greater than it is in Latin America.
Ever since Chavez began his popular upheaval in Venezuela he has been under attack by the Catholic hierarchy in that country. In fact, members of Opus Dei were involved in the failed coup of 2000 and have been instrumental in the CIA-funded opposition movement since the coup, just as they were intimately involved in the murderous CIA-sponsored coup in September 1973 in Chile. Last month, Bishop Baltazar Porras, president of the Venezuelan bishops' conference, said proponents of radical liberation theology are using it to weaken and divide the Church. "This is part of a plan to debilitate the Church," Porras told The Associated Press in an interview last week. He cited a recent forum in which the Church was accused of turning her back on the poor, where Chavez garners most of his political support. "This is a new program led by a group of theologians like the ones in the times of the Sandinista rule in Nicaragua with the same arguments," said Porras. "The argument is fundamentally anti-Catholic, anti-hierarchy." (Catholic World New, 8/15/2005) It is quite interesting to note Porras equating being anti-hierarchy with being anti-Catholic. I wonder how the Jesus who threw the moneychangers out of the temple and challenged the Scribes and the Pharisees would feel about that equation.
Now, in addition to having the Catholic hierarchy opposed to him, Mr. Chavez has incurred the wrath of some in the evangelical community. Given the generally political conservatism of much of this community, this is not surprising. What is surprising, however, is the vehemence of this wrath. Pat Robertson, former US presidential candidate and head of the multimillion-dollar Christian Broadcast Network, called for Chavez's assassination in a broadcast Monday night. Calling assassination " a whole lot cheaper than starting a war" Robertson went on to say that if Chavez were killed by US covert operatives he didn't "think any oil shipments will stop."
Of course, for those who keep their religion close to their heart or use it only when necessary to cynically convince the public of the rightness of their actions, the comments regarding oil must strike a chord. After all, that's the underlying reason for Washington's (and the old guard in Venezuela) opposition to Chavez in the first place. Not only is he using Venezuelan oil revenues to help the perennially poor in Venezuela, he is also selling it to Cuba at cut rates and making deals with China, much to the chagrin of Washington. Chavez and his supporters understand this. In addition, they also understand the Jesus who inspired Father Gutierrez and his liberation theology. That was the Jesus who said: "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven."
Unfortunately, if Mr. Robertson and many others in Washington, Caracas and the Vatican have their way, Hugo Chavez may get his chance to enter that kingdom well before they do. Although I still like to think that if there is a heaven, Mr. Robertson and his ilk will be denied admission.
---
Ron Jacobs is author of The Way the Wind Blew: A history of the Weather Underground, which is just republished by Verso. Jacobs’ essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch’s new collection on music, art and sex, Serpents in the Garden. He can be reached at: ron05401 [at] yahoo.com
http://www.trinicenter.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1127
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$200.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network