In the last few days I've seen two people both attempt to twist the disaster in Haiti to their own means, and unforutantely I'm not making either of these up:
Pat Robertson, right wing US evangelist, was quoted as saying the quake happened because Haiti consorted with the devil (Haiti being 95% Christian...hmm). He then dug his hole deeper by stating the earthquake wasn't all bad because at least they could build new and better homes.
Nick Griffin (always good for making wildly inappropriate comments and then trying to defend them) stated that the British winter would kill more people than the quake did, attacking British politicians for putting the quake victims ahead of UK pensioners.
Am I the only person thinking both of these people's comments, true or otherwise, are in immensely bad taste when the quake only happened three days ago?
Pat Robertson, right wing US evangelist, was quoted as saying the quake happened because Haiti consorted with the devil (Haiti being 95% Christian...hmm). He then dug his hole deeper by stating the earthquake wasn't all bad because at least they could build new and better homes.
Nick Griffin (always good for making wildly inappropriate comments and then trying to defend them) stated that the British winter would kill more people than the quake did, attacking British politicians for putting the quake victims ahead of UK pensioners.
Am I the only person thinking both of these people's comments, true or otherwise, are in immensely bad taste when the quake only happened three days ago?
