Posted on 09/30/2005 10:00:18 PM PDT by churchillbuff
There are many who fall into the trap of: the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Hitchens is never at a loss for words, and is in opposition to the Islamofascist forces, true. But be careful, people, about those whom you would trust and declare affinity for. He is a self declared enemy of the Ummah. He is also a self declared enemy of Western civilization and its Judeo Christian tradition and morality. He is, overall, an evil man who champions mostly evil causes and supports evil deeds.
Why would anyone declare eternal chumship with someone that you would shoot if you saw him on your property?
Ah, so you follow the Left's tactic of quoting someone (me) out of context and attacking a straw-man?
Pathetic.
"Ad hominem"? You've got it in every sentence. You've made claims about me that are UNTRUE. What *is* true is that out 100 leftists out there, 99 are in an 'unholy alliance' with the Jihadist enemies, 1 out of 100 are not. Hitchens is that rare bird, a leftist who actually 'gets it' on the war on terror... who do you and the other anti-Israel-paleo-cons attack? ... no, not the 99 leftists who are aiding and abetting terrorism, but the one leftist standing up to their shameful behavior.
Who's the real left-wing hater here?
Hitchens support for the War on Terror makes him better than mostleftists (say Medea Benjamin) who see the war on terror as just another excuse to find allies to attack western civilization.
If you have a problem with Hitchens defending the War On Terror, state it directly, quit using these leftwing tactics.
Don't hold your breath waiting for a response. This guy has other priorities, it would seem.
I can decide to agree with Hitchens on some things and disagree on others.
A person can do that! I mean they won't get in trouble or anything will they?
Worthwhile forgetting for that is a Goebbel's big lie put forward on this site. Buchanan's running mate was Mrs Foster a black pro-life conservative.
Who would you rather sit next to at dinner, Hichens or Buchanan? I would think Hitchens would be infinitely more entertaining.
I have a problem with little Christopher Hitchens saying he hates anyone who believes in God. I have a problem with him saying that Lenin was a "great man" and Trotsky a "prophetic moralist." I have a problem with him p***ing on the graves of three of the greatest people of the last century--John Paul II, Mother Teresa, and Ronald Reagan. And I have a problem with any "conservative" carrying water for that Commie creep. Is that direct enough?
You go off on an atheist rant and then quickly change the subject to avoid the Mullah label. Lighten up Francis.
Do you agree with Christopher Hitchens that Lenin was "a great man?" That Leon Trotsky "always was a prophetic moralist?" That Ronald Reagan was "dumb as a stump" and a "cruel and stupid lizard?" Do you hate anyone who believes in God, the way Hitchens does? Did you even read the article?
Hitchens anti- Mother Theresa book, "The Missionary Position," is an interesting read. Given the echo chamber of the MSM, his contrarian views are a always worth the read, .
Although I disagree with Hitchens on much, he's been a stronger supporter of the WOT and the US than the Pat Buchanan neanderthals.
I just quoted one of your posts and sent it to WOSG, who seems to have a crush on Hitchens. Hitchens is as hateful as Farrakhan, it's really curious how he's praised by many freepers. What other Leninists do they love?
IT's a bigoted anti-Catholic book. Kind of like saying "Mein KAmpf is an interesting read."
Buchanan has never spewed bigotry toward any group the way Hitchens spews it toward Christians. Hitchens is also a confirmed member of the "Reagan is Satan" club. He's a disgusting individual; the fact that he supports the invasion of Iraq doesn't change that. As I've pointed out, Hillary also supports it - as does Biden and Feinstein. Doesn't make them great in my book. Why should Hitchens be given a pass when they aren't?
Hitchens stands for everything antithetical to traditional conservatism. As Russell Kirk said, the basis of culture is "cultus," religion. There have always been non-religious conservatives. But it is impossible for someone who openly hates Christianity, as Hitchens does, to be a conservative, because a hatred of Christianity involves a hatred of the basis of Western culture.
Who would you rather sit next to at dinner, Hichens or Buchanan? I would think Hitchens would be infinitely more entertaining.
I would rather sit next to a Good man than a Godless man. Hitchens may have his "entertaining flashes" but he is a contemptuous man who would eat you for dinner.
Say what you will about Buchanan, but he is always impressively informative and provocative. He also has one thing that Hitchens will never have - a sense of humor.
Hitchens is a good speaker against islamists, sure.
since islamists are as much of a problem for his beloved Rodina as they are for us (even worse, actually) this is hardly surprising.
I do not choose to sweep Hitchens' past and current sociopolitical beliefs under the rug in gratitude for his utility against islamism, any more than I shall call Stalin a nice guy just because he was an ally against the Nazis.
When does your book burning rally start?
No better proof of this than Ezola Foster.
Hitchens is a loser, but man, as long as he shares the bloodlust of most FReepers, he's cool beans it seems.
Hitchens clearly understands the Islamofacist threat to secular liberalism. Although many of us on this forum may not care for his flavor of secular democracy, we at least share common values of freedom. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Hitchens' former fellow travelers on the left (Chomsky et al) are so obsessed with anti-capitalism and atheism that they would sacrifice their own liberty to defeat capitalistic Christendom. Ergo, cut Hitchens some slack.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.