Christopher hitchens supported saddam hussein then calls him a tyrant?

Is there no end to this guys flip flopping. Saddam who hitchens called one of the greatest tyrants of our time was singing a different tune years back. Is this guy crazy or is he just confused? I cannot believe what I just read about him just by combing through some of his writings. If I were a mainstream atheist I would be seriously thinking twice and 3 times even before following this lunatic.

This is amazing stuff im reading here. How can you support someone who has committed some of the greatest atrocities, yet also say that you support the kurds push for stateshood. This is why I try to stay away from heavy drinking.

 

Hey
I have never heard of Hitchens so I had a look at wikipedia.
Could this quote be the main reason why you don't like the dude but still made him earn his own thread? I'm sure that there have been more than one person who said X about Iraq/Saddam hussein and two years later said Y. Especially in the CIA and the republican party, no? but i'm really far far far from a USA expert.

I followed the link to the book - and put it for download, thanks for the recommendation
And have a look here:
http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showpost.php?p=12345514&postcount=38
I recommend you to put the book top of the list on your download quene or purchase it from amazon.
cheers m8

 

Aren't you the one who's always bitching about lack of citations?

 

Hitchens is a known flip flopper, raging alcaholic but in the time when he's not getting wanked off by every nerdy 14 year old spotty atheist in the UK, he is gets a good spanking by George Galloway in debates.

 

I know I'm a throwback - (my musical taste betrays it...hahahah). I know almost nothing about this fellow (only the title of the book mentioned by Chaos/wiki, above), but am now piqued.

 

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/583733/christopher_hitchens_bill_maher/

 

Thanks for the video!
I like bill maher, the movie religulous was great.

I have trouble in understanding British English....so I always scroll back to hear it again, 2nd time is usually enough...

p.s. metacafe is an Israeli company founded by a friend of mine. http://www.metacafe.com/jobs/ check out the video, cool ppl !

 

Chaos this was during a time a year before amnesty international started reporting on the atrocities he was comitting against his own people. Sounds like this hitchens character just shifts with the wind. I wanted to show what a hypocrite he is. I am against extremism of any kind whether it is religious or atheistic in nature. Now that everyone has started to see what a hypocrite he is I cant believe there are people that would follow this woman hater. I dont see any difference between him and an extremist pastor that calls for the head of a third world leader as the 700 club did against the leader of venezuela, or when the vatican preached against condom education in Africa (but later changed their mind). This can be verified by everyone on this board that have seen me post for many years here. I dont agree with him getting beat up in beirut, but what the heck was he doing defacing a syrian national socialist poster (or whatever it was). Is he really that brainless to think he can do that in such a charged up country like lebanon and get away with it? He certainly has a few screws missing.

I mean he started out as a commi, became a socialist then turned into a neocon. He is good at making money from the hatred he stirs but can he be taken seriously. He also claims that woman arent as funny as men looooooool.

Chaos I happen to like Bill Maher also as he seems to be a very rational guy that doesnt shift as the wind goes like Chris JD hitchens and really isnt about putting people down for their beliefs as much as searching for the truth. When Ron Paul was on his show they really hit it off.

Thraxed , I have not checked out Galloway yet, I think Ill do some youtube research on him

 

You mean possibly before Hitchens knew the crimes Saddam had committed?
I'd like a link if you have one.

I like Hitchens, not really because of his advocacy of atheism, but because he has laid out the case for the war in Iraq, perhaps as eloquently or more so than anyone else.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-we...hitchens_vs_peter_hitchens_2008_part_3_of_14/

And who cares if someone flip flops unless they've done it for votes(and you could even argue that that's not necessarily a bad thing) or because of bribery of some sort. Flip flopping is a sign that someone is able to update their opinion over time given new information or more analysis. It's also the reason spam filters work.

 

Watch hitch the bitch get spanked

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAja9Q1gWsk

 

Hey, I didn't speak in his favour or in his debt. I just don't know anything about this guy
Unlike Christians, Jews, and Muslims which "love other christians/jews/muslims" simply for being christians/jews/muslims, we atheists feel absolutely no attraction to one another just for being atheists, so I have no subconscious sympathy to this guy even if he wrote an anti-god book, in case you suspected

 

Pong thinks that if people don't dogmatically continue to believe what they used to believe in light of new evidence or refreshed perspectives it's a bad thing. I'd like him to explain exactly why its a bad thing, but he wont, so there's little point asking.

 

Stox the problem is hitchens knew of saddams atrocities (amnesty international reports were a full year before his statements) and yet still supported him so that debunks your claim saying he didnt know what saddam was capable. This is your champion of the truth, the lader of the new atheistic movement. He claims he cares for the iraqi people but called saddam a brave visionary even though he knew about the amnest international reports on saddam. Hes hypocrite as well as a liar, but I dont think you will ask me to provide any proof will you. In fact I KNOW you wont. I have yet to see you critize the leader that you absolutely adore. Unlike you im not afraid to critize people in my faith or any faith. Thats called searching for the truth. What you have is absolute faith in this drunken leader.

Again stox your twisting my words to suit your purposes. I never said it wasnt ok to change your beliefs as you grow, but the problem with hitchens is that he uses certain beliefs to further his goal of spreading hatred and disinformation. He critisizes and makes fun of peoples beliefs when he himself doesnt even know what he stands for anymore. Hes a materialistic gossiper. He cares for the kurdish people??????? Give me a break lololol. If he had told the truth after the amnesty international reports came out instead of calling saddam a visionary of the arab world (which suited his master in our government and the british government at the time then I would have respected him. Hes an establishment puppet. With a bit of research you can find his quotes on saddam. You do know how to research your leaders before you pick them dont you stox. I must say thanks again for introducing me to this laugh of a journalist who doesnt believe in citations, thinks his word should be taken as absolute truth and thinks that women arent as funny as men, except for a few jewish female comedians. Now hes not only against women but a racist? lol
He should stick to what he does best which is DRINKING.


Chaos I feel the same way. I would never like someone just for being a theist. I respect people that care for others, respect others, dont redicule others whether they are atheists or theists. If a person has a good heart that is what counts to me. Ever heard of the term " Good samaritan"? This comes from the bible itself and talks about a samaritan (the equivalent of todays moderate atheist) caring enough to pick a sick man up from the side of a road and caring for him. This story shows that religious people should respect non religious people and non religious people should respect religious people. Unlike the hate mongering that stox and his master hitchens spread around, not all atheists are this aggressive and hawkish and extreme in their views.

There is a lesson in my posts, as I do not get any kind of satisfaction posting about hitchens like this.

logix, I have the link. Just waiting for a postback from one of hitchens sheeple, hinty hinty and my guess is since hitchens has been debunked totally he wont be ranting and raving about the great hitchens.

 

LOL. You're obsessed.

 

Not really, I am a moderate and naturally I am against extremism in any form. Hitchens isnt the SAINT that his followers make him out to be. If he really spent so much time writing about the truth as he does about spreading hate with extreme prejudice he could accomplish so much towards the brotherhood of man, and when has it been ok to support tyrants when they suit your ends and then turn on them when it becomes popular opinion. I have never been involved in such a one sided debate. This is a slam dunk, home run and goal all rolled into one.

 

pong your ranting dogmatic fanaticism is very, well, religious. well done.

Why is it a bad thing to change ones mind? Are you saying he should have continued with an old belief even though his perspective had change?

Hitchens support for Saddam Hussein began in in 1976 in an article he wrote for New Statesman aged 33, 12 years before Saddam gassed kurds and 3 years before he even became prime minister. As Hitchens perspective changed and new evidence came forward he changed his mind. I really don't see how that is a bad thing.

I happen to disagree with Hitchens regarding the war in Iraq. But then, us atheists are allowed to disagree on some things even if we agree on others. it's a perk of thinking for ourselves, you should give it a try.

 

Again Stox your conveniently leaving out the amnesty international report on saddam that came out 1 year earlier detailing saddams atrocities. Hitchens also conveniently left it out also. Seems like you both have a tendency for selective memory which is also a trait that you share in common, and of course your implying that theists all have one opinion. Another tendency to be intellectually dishonest. Hitchens tends to spread some bad habits among his fanatical followers.

Schools out

stox u will get the link in due time. Im just having nice day , and as you will soon see, another slam dunker is coming. I think i will retire after posting this one link.

 

Pong i'll ask you again, but thanks for for predictably doing the very thing i said you would.
Why is it a bad thing to change ones mind? Are you saying he should have continued with an old belief even though his perspective had change and more evidence came to light?

I can't find a 1975 amnesty report, post a link to it.

It's quite funny that you would see changing ones mind as new evidence and perspectives come to light as a bad thing, to the rest of us it shown integrity and honesty, obliviously concepts alien to someone such as yourself.

keep digging pong, we can still see you.

 

Sheesh stox im getting very tired of owning you. First you become silent on his childishly written book on mother teresa , then become silent on his view that men are funnier then women. Lets go for a trifecta. Im doing 1 hand pushups and eating breakfast while writing this response. How many times must I show that this hitchens character is a drunk, hater of the female gender and spreader of disinformation for the left as well as the right wing (moreso now for the right wing since he discovered that 90% proof jack daniels). He supported a tyrant and not only that but was very enthusiastic about him just because he happened to be a socialist at the time like hitchens. The guys a fraud and never cared for the iraqi people.
He also called the kurds the largest people without a state. ANOTHER LIE.
Wow, this guy is full of lies. What intellectual atheist would follow this nutcase. Today he speaks badly about the humor of women, tomorrow will he tells us not to own dogs in our house because he feels that jack daniels is saying that they are not to be trusted and are not mans best friend?

We should all pool our resources together and get this hitchens guy a good therapist.



http://christopherhitchenswatch.blogspot.com/

While Hitchens was penning this paean, Amnesty International was monitoring Iraq through rather differently tinted glasses. In its report for 1975-76, it stated:

Iraq remains one of the most serious violators of human rights in the Middle East. Amnesty International continues to receive reports of arbitrary arrests routine torture, summary executions and inadequate legal safeguards It is however, difficult to give a comprehensive picture of political imprisonment because of the paucity of detailed and reliable information.

This is due largely to the secrecy which surrounds arrests, detentions and executions in Iraq. Equally, it is difficult to apply traditional AI techniques where information is so inadequate, and where the government tends to be highly sensitive about what it considers as interventions in its internal affairs.

There are no official or unofficial figures for the number of persons currently imprisoned for political reasons. Throughout the eight years of Baath Party rule, all opposition has been systematically suppressed, and has been considerably reduced as a result."​

 

Answer it. Why is it a bad thing to change ones mind? Are you saying he should have continued with an old belief even though his perspective had change and more evidence came to light?

As dishonest as it is to try and reduce other threads to meaningless crap when you have no credibility or arguments left to do it to your own threads shows you have a particularly weak argument.

You are all over the place here pong. we get it, you don't like the guy, but engage your brain before attempting a character assassination because, well, you aren't very good at them.