|
crazyboyxx (September 4, 2008 at 10:18 pm)
Hitchens whilst being a great man of supreme intelligence, has some horrendous and ignorant views on torture. It is quite bizarre how much he loves the US government for supposedly defending freedom despite the fact that any layman can see that defending freedom is not even on their agenda.
mdelcamp1 (September 3, 2008 at 12:18 am)
Nothing quite like solidarity with your 1968 Classmate at University, William Jefferson Clinton, Hitch My Boy! I like hash brownies myself. Too bad all the prim and proper law and order types, such as Nixon and yourself, cannot ever countenance loosening up the neckties, on either yourself, or on others. Why not condemn three martini lunches, or drinking with the wife after a hard day at the office, Chris Hitch? Did not occur to you?
lGnossos (August 27, 2008 at 2:29 pm)
support the people who are instrumental in creating and supporting fundamentalism within the US and across the globe (i.e. the so called neocons and US policy makers in general).
lGnossos (August 27, 2008 at 2:25 pm)
"...any call to indict the United States for torture is...a lame and diseased attempt to arrive at a moral equivalence between those who defend civilization and those who exploit its freedoms to hollow it out, and ultimately to bring it down. I myself do not trust anybody who does not clearly understand this viewpoint." -HitchensWell I don't trust anyone who advocates state torture and tries to rationalize aggression. Yes, fundamental extremism is scary, which is why Hitchens should not
jacobssandy (August 26, 2008 at 3:57 am)
But Hitchens' main point always is that so much of the advocation of violence is built right into the religion within its texts and something which poses such a serious threat to anyone who places any value upon freedom and humanity doesn't deserve anything except outright contempt. And if that is "prejudice" then count me in.
OneBigRetard (August 19, 2008 at 8:12 am)
Hitchens does not dislike on grounds of race but on action. Muslim facists choose to speak and act as they do. This is not racism, it is not actually much of a prejudice, more a postjudice.The people Hitch targets convict themselves by word and deed. I think you do Hitchens and even yourself a diservice by jumping behind the race relations shield. This is not a lack of understanding here, which less face it, racism is. This is an honest appraisal.
lGnossos (August 19, 2008 at 8:00 am)
# based on racial intolerance; "racist remarks"# a person with a prejudiced belief that one race is superior to others# discriminatory especially on the basis of race or religion - but you're right, prejudice is more accurate, however less representative of the vileness with which it should be treated. I should note that Hitchens is much more civil in this talk than others.
OneBigRetard (August 19, 2008 at 7:00 am)
No, it is perhaps prejudice, but not racist. How can you be racist without a race?Hitchens has never spoken for or about 'all its followers'.They do a good enough job of dehuminising themselves.I don't think that about genocide, the Nazis or us.
lGnossos (August 19, 2008 at 4:48 am)
No, Islam is not a race, but to assume all it's followers adhere to an ideology of violence and extremism is very racist. Good point with Nazis, we assume that all Nazis were pro genocidal, and thus we never believe something like that could happen here, because of course we only believe in justice! I'm not against religious criticism, I'm quite critical of hit, but I am very much against dehumanizing the enemy.
OneBigRetard (August 18, 2008 at 9:11 pm)
Muslims are not a 'race'. They are followers of an ideology. Nobody whinges when he speaks against Nazism. |
