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 $200 billion 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.
