Yesterday’s Washington Post story, Regime Change By Assassin? Easier Said Than Done, raised some interesting points:
JFK tried to assassinate Castro. Reagan came darn close to getting Moammar Gaddafi when we bombed Libyan “targets” where we believed the leader was present, in the 80s. Clinton authorized the CIA to “find and kill Bin Laden.” And most recently, Uday and Qusay Hussein, the two sons of Saddam, met an untimely end.
In his blog today, Dan Flynn asks the question: Why is War Moral But Assassination Not?
“If one concedes that Hitler's would-be assassins' actions were heroic, then one can't logically dismiss out-of-hand the general idea that assassination is on very rare occassions a moral and beneficial act.”
So maybe Pat wasn’t so far out in left field? Who knows. All I know is that you can’t say something, then say you didn’t say it, then apologize for it . . .
Robertson’s comments ironically provided fodder to those who wish to assassinate his character. But, at least he sparked some intellectual debate about Gerald Ford’s executive order.
Hey, maybe he can pardon Pat, too!
