State Department Protests Televangelist's Remark

  • News
  • Thread starter megashawn
  • Start date
  • Tags
    State
In summary: But if he were Muslim, he'd be locked up in a heartbeat.In summary, televangelist Pat Robertson has come under fire for making comments about blowing up government buildings, which he says he derived from a book. Many are questioning why no legal action has been taken against him, while others argue that if he were Muslim, he would have been arrested by now. Some believe this highlights the issue of domestic fundamentalism and the administration's stance on it.
  • #1
megashawn
Science Advisor
451
0
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=573&ncid=757&e=9&u=/nm/20031010/od_nm/people_robertson_dc


This is exactly the kind of crap I've been talking about. How can a person who speaks of blowing up government buildings be allowed to walk the streets? I know we have freedom of speech, but this seems borderline terrorist plot.

The evangelist says he came to this conclusion after reading a guys book. The funny thing is the guy who wrote it had not thoughts of blowing up the state department and never implied such action.

My question is, why are people so hell bent on destruction? I thought evangelist were supposed to be speaking about neighbor loving,... er. love thy neighbor and stuff.

This seemed like the right place since it was a threat to a government organization, but if not it won't hurt my feelings if you move it, I can see how it could easily fall off topic.

Shouldn't some kind of legal action be taking place?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Robertson is a half-wit.

If he were an Islamic cleric, he'd be cooling his heels in camp X-Ray right now. If the administration were serious about crushing everyone's civil liberties, and not just the civil liberties of muslims, that's where Robertson should be sent.

So, how about it Ashcroft? Chicken?
 
  • #3
This is the way of the world...if you are a white Christian right-wing nutjob, or a reasonable facsimile of one, you can make any threats you like, and be hailed by your fellow right-wing nutjobs. Remember folks; saying that Bush is a crappy president is bad, saying that you want to blow up people who disagree with the right-wing is ok.
 
  • #4
I'm hoping that one of these remarks would finally make the Bush administration take the threat of domestic fundamentalism seriously.
 
  • #5
Originally posted by FZ+
I'm hoping that one of these remarks would finally make the Bush administration take the threat of domestic fundamentalism seriously.
What, you mean instead of trying to funnel all our money to f***ing churches?
 
  • #6
exactly, he does take it seriously; he is their biggist supporter.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #7
Originally posted by FZ+
I'm hoping that one of these remarks would finally make the Bush administration take the threat of domestic fundamentalism seriously.
Why would he? He's a fundamentalist himself.
 
  • #8
Originally posted by Tsunami
Why would he? He's a fundamentalist himself.
Shhhhh...telling the truth about Bush is un-American!
 
  • #9
Do you guys even think about the implications of what you are saying? Bush advocates domestic terrorism? Uh, sure...

Or are you guys in the 9/11 conspiracy theory camp?
 
  • #10
Well, I don't know about lil bush supporting the nuts views, but if he is providing the organization with money, for whatever purposes, it doesn't seem right.

To me it is a signal that we've got serious problems in our own borders that need attention. For some reason I have a feeling if I got on a public forum and spoke about blowing up my local courthouse or something, I'd get in trouble. And like you mention, if it was an islamic person, we'd probably have the army after them.

It still seems like making threats of mass destruction, especially on american soil, should rank right up there with treason.

And how about this view of dropping a nuke to solve the problems with a corrupt government? The fool hasn't even thought about the long term effects, or worse yet, knows about them and doesn't care. That attitude is expressed best by a bumper sticker I read:

Forget about saving the world
Save your soul. The world will burn.
What about you?

So with that attitude implied, we can just go nuke everyone/thing we don't like or is corrupt, and not worry about the consequences. And what really gets me is people keep coming back to this nonsense.
 
  • #11
If this guy were a normal citizen and not a celebrity, he'd be cooling off in some jail cell right now, and contemplating the federal charges pending against him. You don't threaten the us government without the FBI CIA and every other agency visiting your doorstep. Pat is right up there with jimmy baker. What a jackass.
 
  • #12
Originally posted by russ_watters
Do you guys even think about the implications of what you are saying? Bush advocates domestic terrorism? Uh, sure...

Or are you guys in the 9/11 conspiracy theory camp?
No, what we are saying is that if the threat comes from his base, this administration isn't going to actively pursue it.
 
  • #13
Originally posted by Zantra
If this guy were a normal citizen and not a celebrity, he'd be cooling off in some jail cell right now, and contemplating the federal charges pending against him. You don't threaten the us government without the FBI CIA and every other agency visiting your doorstep. Pat is right up there with jimmy baker. What a jackass.
Actually, he might still be ok, because he isn't Muslim.
 

1. What was the remark made by the televangelist that sparked the State Department protests?

The televangelist made a controversial statement about a specific religion or religious group that was deemed offensive by many individuals, leading to the State Department protests.

2. What is the purpose of the State Department protests?

The purpose of the State Department protests is to peacefully demonstrate against the televangelist's remark and show disapproval of the offensive statement.

3. Who is organizing the State Department protests?

The State Department protests may be organized by various groups or individuals who feel strongly about the televangelist's remark and want to make their voices heard.

4. Have there been any consequences for the televangelist's remark?

It is not clear if there have been any specific consequences for the televangelist's remark. However, the protests may put pressure on the televangelist to issue an apology or face backlash from the public.

5. How can individuals show their support for the State Department protests?

Individuals can show their support for the State Department protests by participating in peaceful demonstrations, sharing information about the protests on social media, or contacting their local representatives to voice their concerns.

Similar threads

  • General Discussion
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
32
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • MATLAB, Maple, Mathematica, LaTeX
Replies
5
Views
3K
Back
Top