Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Bitch About Hitchens Here

Options
123578

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    The Irony.

    I'm sorry you've lost me. What is ironic in that statement?


  • Options
    #123
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    This is self-contradictory nonsense.


    1- "Well don't keep me in suspense then. I'm intrigued to know what you can tell me about myself that I don't know already on the basis of a "favourite Hitchens quote".

    2- A favourite quote doesn't have to be my most favourite quote.
    Keep fishing troll.


  • Options
    #124
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    ShooterSF wrote: »
    I'm sorry you've lost me. What is ironic in that statement?

    That a chief Iraqi war campaigner, who tried incessantly to justify the illegal war of aggression and it's resulting destruction, torture and death even after it became evident it was based lies and war propaganda - which he parroted: WMD, Anthrax, Iraq and 9-11 etc - making himself appear utterly foolish. That this same warmonger would have previously have had such high praise ("possible visonary") for the victim states leader prior to tirelessly campaigning for this same illegal war of aggression which led to the "possible visionary's" overthrow and execution is ironic IMO.


  • Options
    #125
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    That a chief Iraqi war campaigner, who tried incessantly to justify the illegal war of aggression and it's resulting destruction, torture and death even after it became evident it was based lies and war propaganda - which he parroted: WMD, Anthrax, Iraq and 9-11 etc - making himself appear utterly foolish. That this same warmonger would have previously have had such high praise ("possible visonary") for the victim states leader prior to tirelessly campaigning for this same illegal war of aggression which led to the "possible visionary's" overthrow and execution is ironic IMO.

    That's not irony. It's re-evaluating your position. For example I thought Eddie Murphy was a great actor after "Coming to America" and "Trading Places". However that doesn't mean I should have to stand by that belief when he made films like "Norbit" and "Dave" afterwards.
    Hardly fair to expect me to be foresee the future when I made the original statement.
    Going by your tone it appears you have an underlying issue with Hitchens which I might suggest is colouring your view of that quote. Anyways whether it does or doesn't, it most certainly isn't ironic. Maybe "a mistake in hindsight" would be a better description.


  • Options
    #126
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    ShooterSF wrote: »
    That's not irony. It's re-evaluating your position. For example I thought Eddie Murphy was a great actor after "Coming to America" and "Trading Places". However that doesn't mean I should have to stand by that belief when he made films like "Norbit" and "Dave" afterwards.
    Hardly fair to expect me to be foresee the future when I made the original statement.
    Perhaps it's not irony. Replace irony with re-evaluating his position and you then have my reason for it being a favourite quote seeing as it is so at odds with his later pro-war/anti-Saddam stance.
    ShooterSF wrote: »
    Going by your tone it appears you have an underlying issue with Hitchens
    No. I have issues with wars based on lies with "collateral damage" that could fill Wembley Stadium with corpses based on the most conservative estimates. I have issues with situations like Fallujah, DU babies and Abu Ghraib. To be anti-those who encourage this death and destruction is not personal.
    ShooterSF wrote: »
    Anyways whether it does or doesn't, it most certainly isn't ironic. Maybe "a mistake in hindsight" would be a better description.
    Even that is arguable; but not for here I'd imagine.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    ShooterSF
    Registered Users Posts: 8,824 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    I'm sure you could have that argument here but it would be pointless with me as my views on that war while probably not the same as yours is not at the opposite end of the spectrum either.

    I do kind of like the quote though. It shows a certain courage to admit when you feel you are wrong and to change your mind. Even if one doesn't agree with the change... It's much easier to dig your heels in even if deep down you're wrong, something we can all be guilty of.

    Though I doubt that was the purpose of sharing the quote ;)


  • Options
    #128
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    No. I have issues with wars based on lies with "collateral damage" that could fill Wembley Stadium with corpses based on the most conservative estimates. I have issues with situations like Fallujah, DU babies and Abu Ghraib. To be anti-those who encourage this death and destruction is not personal.

    Can you link us to an article of his where he encourages the death of children, the false imprisonment of innocent people, the death of innocent people or torture? Or are you still grossly misrepresenting him?

    It seems to me you're doing to opposite of what snafuk35 was doing to robindch earlier in the thread, just because robindch doesn't support the war doesn't mean he supports Saddam, and likewise just because Hitchens supports the overthrowing of a dictactor, doesn't mean he supports all the death and destruction that comes with it. You do realise that that's possible don't you?


  • Options
    #129
    ISAW
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,142 ✭✭✭ISAW


    I am given to understand Hitchens was a very strong supporter of Irish Republicanism. I dint notice this in any obituaries. Was it true?


  • Options
    #130
    [-0-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭[-0-]


    ISAW wrote: »
    I am given to understand Hitchens was a very strong supporter of Irish Republicanism. I dint notice this in any obituaries. Was it true?

    When speaking about Churchill in Love, Poverty & War he talks about Ireland briefly. He was a supporter of the unification of Ireland.


  • Options
    #131
    A.Tomas
    Registered Users Posts: 159 ✭✭A.Tomas


    To all those phonies who want to worship some bloated, obnoxious,
    narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual, best of British pork, maybe they could give their analysis on one of his outstanding comments shown here.


    http://dziennikarz.mirocommunity.org/video/3792/christopher-hitchens-racist


    I'm sure there will be so many eejits who have invested so much into believing their enlightened by proxy that they will not accept that they're the sycophantic non-thinking twits and the more cynical and laid back of us were right.;)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    pH
    Registered Users Posts: 4,188 ✭✭✭pH


    A.Tomas wrote: »
    To all those phonies who want to worship some bloated, obnoxious,
    narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual, best of British pork, maybe they could give their analysis on one of his outstanding comments shown here.


    http://dziennikarz.mirocommunity.org/video/3792/christopher-hitchens-racist


    I'm sure there will be so many eejits who have invested so much into believing their enlightened by proxy that they will not accept that they're the sycophantic non-thinking twits and the more cynical and laid back of us were right.;)
    hZKL9MDF_original.jpg


  • Options
    #133
    [-0-]
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,981 ✭✭✭[-0-]


    A.Tomas wrote: »
    To all those phonies who want to worship some bloated, obnoxious,
    narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual, best of British pork, maybe they could give their analysis on one of his outstanding comments shown here.


    http://dziennikarz.mirocommunity.org/video/3792/christopher-hitchens-racist


    I'm sure there will be so many eejits who have invested so much into believing their enlightened by proxy that they will not accept that they're the sycophantic non-thinking twits and the more cynical and laid back of us were right.;)

    But an Irish Setter is all of those things...


  • Options
    #134
    Sarky
    Closed Accounts Posts: 31,967 ✭✭✭✭Sarky


    You see where you went wrong there A.Tomas, don't you? You came on too strong, too quickly. Trolling successfully is all about the pacing. As a great method actor once said, you never go full retard.


  • Options
    #135
    Bandana boy
    Registered Users Posts: 4,325 ✭✭✭Bandana boy


    A.Tomas wrote: »
    To all those phonies who want to worship some bloated, obnoxious,
    narrow-minded, pseudo-intellectual, best of British pork, maybe they could give their analysis on one of his outstanding comments shown here.


    http://dziennikarz.mirocommunity.org/video/3792/christopher-hitchens-racist


    I'm sure there will be so many eejits who have invested so much into believing their enlightened by proxy that they will not accept that they're the sycophantic non-thinking twits and the more cynical and laid back of us were right.;)

    I genuinely think he was talking about the breed of Dog


  • Options
    #136
    A.Tomas
    Registered Users Posts: 159 ✭✭A.Tomas


    Awwww, seems like I was correct in my prediction.

    Well done guys, right on cue!:D


  • Options
    #137
    A.Tomas
    Registered Users Posts: 159 ✭✭A.Tomas


    Bandana boy wrote: »
    I genuinely think he was talking about the breed of Dog


    Really?... A lot people don't. A lot of non-religious/tolerant/intelligent people think he was a pr1ck.


  • Options
    #138
    guitarzero
    Registered Users Posts: 1,425 ✭✭✭guitarzero


    Thought the guy was a pr*ick. Enjoyed his ass being handed to him by George Galloway in a debate on Palestine. Not against everything he said but it often felt that the source of everything he said was fuelled by hatred itself.


  • Options
    #139
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    guitarzero wrote: »
    Thought the guy was a pr*ick. Enjoyed his ass being handed to him by George Galloway in a debate on Palestine. Not against everything he said but it often felt that the source of everything he said was fuelled by hatred itself.

    that *never* happened
    i dont know if I saw the debate you saw, but I saw them together a couple of times and galloway was made to look an ass every time.


  • Options
    #140
    Vomit
    Registered Users Posts: 512 ✭✭✭Vomit


    guitarzero wrote: »
    Thought the guy was a pr*ick. Enjoyed his ass being handed to him by George Galloway in a debate on Palestine. Not against everything he said but it often felt that the source of everything he said was fuelled by hatred itself.


    Are you sure it was about Palestine? I do remember seeing one between Hitchens and Galloway about the Iraq war, in which Galloway reduced Hitchens to a stuttering mess, and made him look like an actual idiot. Hitchens spent most of the debate repeating the lies that the US Senate had put forth about Galloway. This happened pretty soon after Galloway spectacularly defended himself in front of the Senate. Hitchens managed a few cheap digs, but his arguments were fairly weak throughout. He also fell back on the whole 'insult the audience' thing.

    Now, there are certain things I don't like about George Galloway, but I've always admired his anti-war campaigning, his consistency, and indeed his defense of the Palestinian people.


  • Options
    #141
    fitz0
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,753 ✭✭✭fitz0


    A.Tomas wrote: »
    Really?... A lot people don't. A lot of non-religious/tolerant/intelligent people think he was a pr1ck.

    Hitchen was a prick in many ways. But by God (ahem) he was good at it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    RichieC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,333 ✭✭✭RichieC


    is a thomas calling the irish dogs? :mad:


  • Options
    #143
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    Can you link us to an article of his where he encourages the death of children, the false imprisonment of innocent people, the death of innocent people or torture? Or are you still grossly misrepresenting him?

    This is the same idiotic argument of holocaust deniers who ask you to point out where Hitler stated he wanted to exterminate the Jews.

    I have no intention in explaining the self-evident to you, namely the direct relationship between war and death/destruction.


  • Options
    #144
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »
    that *never* happened
    i dont know if I saw the debate you saw, but I saw them together a couple of times and galloway was made to look an ass every time.

    Maybe you have never seen this one then?

    Hitchens was a sweat-soaked, twitching mess by the end.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLKQGwVkczg


  • Options
    #145
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    This is the same idiotic argument of holocaust deniers who ask you to point out where Hitler stated he wanted to exterminate the Jews.

    I have no intention in explaining the self-evident to you, namely the direct relationship between war and death/destruction.

    So, that's a no then?

    cilla1.jpg

    Carry on troll.


  • Options
    #146
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    So, that's a no then?

    Carry on troll.

    Surely it's trolling to constantly accuse someone of trolling? We have different opinions, get over it, it's not trolling. If you idolise Hitchens and other boorish, bigoted warmongers of his ilk and are over-protective that is not my concern.

    As for your point, do you agree that Hitchens vehemently advocated the illegal Iraqi invasion?

    If so, which of the following points that you raised didn't happen as a result of the invasion/occupation?

    1. the death of children,
    2. the false imprisonment of innocent people,
    3. the death of innocent people
    4. or torture


  • Options
    #147
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Surely it's trolling to constantly accuse someone of trolling? We have different opinions, get over it, it's not trolling. If you idolise Hitchens and other boorish, bigoted warmongers of his ilk and are over-protective that is not my concern.

    Misrepresentation, a trait of the troll.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    As for your point, do you agree that Hitchens vehemently advocated the illegal Iraqi invasion?

    If so, which of the following points that you raised didn't happen as a result of the invasion/occupation?
    1. the death of children,
    2. the false imprisonment of innocent people,
    3. the death of innocent people
    4. or torture

    You seem to be of the opinion that if someone supports a war, then they encourage these things, which if quite frankly ludicrous, which is demonstrated by the fact that he was against the use of torture (the other items on your list kinda go without saying), which is why you're a troll.


  • Options
    #148
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    MagicMarker wrote: »
    You seem to be of the opinion that if someone supports a war, then they encourage these things, which if quite frankly ludicrous,
    No. It's ludicrous to think that death of innocents and destruction is seperable from war itself. Death and destruction is a component of war. Torture is an an almost certain by-product. Can you name a war that didn't involve torture?

    Is Hitchens an imbecile? Was he ignorant of these obvious facts?
    MagicMarker wrote: »
    which is demonstrated by the fact that he was against the use of torture (the other items on your list kinda go without saying
    Which is probably why he said this in a debate with Chris Hedges right?
    “I think the enemies of civilization should be beaten and killed and defeated, and I don’t make any apology for it.”


  • Options
    #149
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,401 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Surely it's trolling to constantly accuse someone of trolling?
    Not if the person being accused is continually ignoring questions, misrepresenting other people's points of view, soapboxing, taking quotes out of context and so on. In this tread, you have done all of these things and so, in this case, the accusation of trolling is useful and accurate.


  • Options
    #150
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    robindch wrote: »
    Not if the person being accused is continually ignoring questions, misrepresenting other people's points of view, soapboxing, taking quotes out of context and so on. In this tread, you have done all of these things and so, in this case, the accusation of trolling is useful and accurate.

    I completely refute all of this unsupported claim.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    No. It's ludicrous to think that death of innocents and destruction is seperable from war itself. Death and destruction is a component of war. Torture is an an almost certain by-product. Can you name a war that didn't involve torture?

    Is Hitchens an imbecile? Was he ignorant of these obvious facts?

    Where did anyone say that death and destruction is separable from war? You seem to be completely ignoring that point that's being made to you.

    Supporting a war, according to you, means to encourage the death of children, innocents as well as torture.

    Unless you're a pacifist then you're quite simply a hypocrite. Go out and ask your friends tomorrow if we were right to have fought the Nazis, and when they say yes I'm sure you'll show as much contempt for them as you do Hitchens. Unless, once again, you're a hypocrite.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Which is probably why he said this in a debate with Chris Hedges right?

    UTD beat Wigan last week, I suppose they encourage torture too?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement