Pat Robertson, one of the leaders of the so-called "Christian Right," host or former host of "The 700 Club," former candidate for President in the Republican primaries in 1988 and a raving anti-Semite, has called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez Frías. His actual quote in the NY Times today is, in reference to Chávez: "If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war. And I don't think any oil shipments will stop."

How does Robertson know that the assassination of Chávez would not provoke a war?

The NY Times says further on: "Mr Rumsfeld dismissed Mr. Robertson's remark on assassination, saying: 'Certainly it's against the law. Our Department doesn't do that type of thing.' He added, 'Private citizens say all kinds of things all the time.'"

Despite Rumsfeld's remarks to the contrary, the USA has a terrible history of assassinating directly or orchestrating the assassinations of
popular leaders of whom it disapproves. It is widely believed that the CIA was involved in the assassination of Patrice Lumumba of the Congo in the 1960s. The CIA was definitely involved in the coup in Chile on September 11, 1973 when Chilean President Salvador Allende was assassinated. Maurice Bishop, the leader of Grenada at the time, was killed in the 1983 invasion of that tiny island nation.

Venezuela ambassador in Washington, DC Bernardo Alvarez notes: "Mr. Robertson has been one of the president's staunchest allies. His statement demands the strongest condemnation by the White House."

Given the history of the USA in international affairs and Robertson's influence within the Republican Party as a leader of the so-called "Christian Right," his remarks cannot just be dismissed as the rantings of a madman. Robertson does give the impression of being a madman and probably is one but, if so, he is a madman with influence and power. The US government and its servants of imperialism operating in Venezuela were behind the coup attempt in Venezuela.

Therefore, Robertson's remarks represent a real threat and he belongs in jail. The remarks go beyond just the "free expression of ideas." If anybody made a particular threat, whether in public or heard and reported in private, to assassinate a particular individual in the USA and especially a public official, that person would go to prison for making terroristic threats. Why should the standard be any different for what Robertson says, given that by him being the one saying so as a staunch ally of the president, there appears to be a strong likelihood that such an activity would either be carried out or at least attempted?

In addition, Robertson's remark shows the hypocrisy of the so-called
"Christian Right." I don't claim to be a Christian or anything else where religion is concerned, but I always thought that a "commandment" was an "order" rather than a "suggestion." Are Christians allowed to follow the Commandments that they like and ignore the ones they don't like? How "Christian" is it of Robertson to advocate the assassination of anyone in contravention of the Commandment that "Thou shalt not kill?"

Robertson has proved, all by his little self, that the so-called "Christian Right" is neither. He has also proved that he is unfit to walk the streets a free man or to continue to pollute our airwaves which, by the way, belong to the people, not the corporations or Pat Robertson. Pat Robertson to prison and off the airwaves!

Chávez is right to speak up for the poor and the workingclass of Venezuela. Robertson seems to forget that Jesus Christ walked among the poor and advocated for them, not for Halliburton and the other corrupt imperialist interests.