Robertson taken off the air in Finland.

His show and several other "Christian" TV programs/networks should be eliminated in the US also!

 

Totally agree!
But would have rephrased "Christian" as "So called Christian". Robertson will one day pay a dear price for missusing the Christian Faith for his own personal gain.

 

I personally believe in FREE SPEECH!

 

I also beilieve in free speech but it is the prerogative of the T.V. station as to choose to air Robertson's "700 Club" or not.

 

Finnish TV is state controlled without commercials. Sure was nice when I lived there to watch a program in much less time than here.

 

It's a two way street. What if a Christian run station was offered the oppurtunity to air something like the the tacky WWF Smackdown. I say let stations decide if it is in thier best interest to run these types of programs or not.

 

Free speech does not guarantee a platform. It only guarantees that you can say what you want without the government shutting you up. And since this is not in the US, not even that applies.

 

The issue in this thread is that someone wrote that christian tv in the US should not air certain preachers.

 

This is my example of my previous post.
My response wasw that I belive in free Speech.
Finland can do what they will without me complaining since I am not from Finland.

 

Local stations that air the syndicated feed are free to drop the 700 Club at the end of their contracts. If you want your local station to drop it, feel free to call and/or write.

If you want ABC Family Channel, its parent network, to drop it too.. tough. Won't happen. ABC Family cannot cancel or alter the content of the show by terms of the contract of sale. Block the channel if he bothers you that much.

 

Given that Robertson has attempted to solicit the commission of a criminal offence, it is entirely right and proper that he be banned, both in Finland and elsewhere, in exactly the same way that those sponsoring Islamic terrorism should not be given any airtime.

 

It will be interesting to follow the money trail on this one.
--------------------------------
Some Question Robertson's Katrina Charity
Operation Blessing Is Second on FEMA's List for Donations for Hurricane Victims
By BRIAN ROSS
Sep. 9, 2005 - Charity and religious leaders are questioning why the Federal Emergency Management Agency designated Operation Blessing as the No. 2 charity for donations in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.

Operation Blessing is the charity founded and still chaired by Pat Robertson, the politically well-connected television evangelist, who recently called for the assassination of Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela.

"Ladies and gentlemen, we've never had anything like this," Robertson told his audience. "Let's rally together and do what we can."

In the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the federal government, through FEMA, issued a list of charities to which Americans should donate. On that list, Operation Blessing was only second to the American Red Cross.

Charity leaders say this FEMA recommendation is a huge boost for Robertson's charity.

"It could be worth tens of millions of dollars," said Richard Walden, president and founder of Operation USA, a non-governmental organization specializing in disaster relief.

However, as Robertson hosted his daily television show in Mississippi this week, other charity leaders were questioning why FEMA had recommended Robertson's operation and left others off the list, including Walden's Operation USA.

"I was shocked," said Walden upon seeing Robertson's charity so prominently displayed on the FEMA Web site. "It stuck out for a reason because of Pat Robertson's activities over the years."


Questions of Accountability
Seven years ago, those activities led Virginia investigators to say there was evidence to prove Robertson "willfully induced contributions from the public through the use of misleading statements." Robertson denied the allegations. He then personally reimbursed Operation Blessing. No action was taken.

"Based on their track record, I would say that, as an individual, I would not give to Operational Blessing," admitted the Rev. Charles Henderson, a Presbyterian minister, who is the executive director of the Association for Religion and Intellectual Life.

According to its most recent filing with the Internal Revenue Service, Operation Blessing gave more than half of its yearly allocation of cash donations -- $885,000 -- to the Christian Broadcasting Network, or CBN, of which Robertson is also the chairman.

"There is no accountability when you have two boards working hand in hand like this," said Henderson. "One never knows when you're contributing to Operation Blessing whether the money is really going to the hurricane victims, or whether it's going to pay for some more television time for Pat Robertson's television show."

Some charity watchdog groups have given high marks to Operation Blessing. Bill Horan, the charity's president, at first denied his charity gave any money to Robertson's television operation.

"Well, that's an absolute, total and complete distortion of the truth," Horan said. "Operation Blessing does not give 1 red cent to CBN."

When he was told of the Operation Blessing documents obtained by ABC News, which show a contribution of $885,000 to CBN, Horan called it an accounting issue.

"I'm president of a charity that's been working 22 to 24 hours a day for the last week trying to save lives down there," he said, "and I'm not going to talk any more about the issues that involve accounting."

A spokesman for Operation Blessing later told ABC News that the charity utilizes Robertson's television network as a conduit for delivering donations overseas, and that none of the money has been used for network activities.

As for FEMA, Director Michael Brown says that he does not know who decided to recommend Robertson's charity so prominently.

ABC News' David Scott and Avni Patel contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2005 ABC News Internet Ventures

 

Whether or not a network should air Robertson's show is a moot point. Of course they shouldn't. This guy embarassed the administration and interfered in our diplomacy, not to mention advocating murder.

But if he can find a network with standards sufficiently low to take him, they have a perfect right to air his show.

 

Separating Robertson's words from a moral standpoint, what is illogical about a preference for a head of state to be killed as opposed to hundreds or thousands of citizens from at least 2 different countries in order to pursue the same or similar objective?