Christopher Hitchens rocks.
http://www.slate.com/id/2135499/nav/tap2/
I really have little to add at this point. I completely agree with that article. Feel free to comment if you like.
(edited to add that I disagree with Hitchens on the Iraq war, but love what he has to say about religion)
posted by Red Tulips @ Wednesday, February 08, 2006
26 Comments:
Chris Hitchens is a Jew, well known as such--he's a piece of shit. (U told me to "feel free to comment.")
One of the tactics of Jew lies is to quote upon well-known Jew tactics--such as given in the "Protocols of Learn Elders of Zion," for example, to sneer as the quotation is given, thus pretending it isn't true and that anyone who thinks so is a fool. But the "Protocols..." well describe Jew tactics regardless as to actual author.
And the Talmud remains the controlling document of Judaism, no Jew being Jew without such Talmud as authority. And note Talmud definitively says Christ was justly executed for blasphemy and heresy--and that's (basically) all there is to it. (For there is actually much more as to Talmud's strategy given for destruction of gentiles and "goyim.") Again, ck Mike A. Hoffman II, "Judaism's Strange Gods" or Ted Pike's "Israel--Our Duty...Our Dilemma."
Again qrswave, u have my definitive essays on WhiteAlert.com, NewNation.org, and in the posting for blog, "Truth Does Not Negotiate With Lies." U have duly gotten the definitive word and all necessary arguments. Ur only task now is to ck out the document in question, Talmud, in order to see if I'm right for analysis given. Until u've ck'd out such Talmud, u must withhold comment (at least), as u don't know what u're talking about regarding the well-justified contempt, hatred, and prejudice which Jews deserve and have well-earned over and over throughout history. Presently u're simply victim and dupe of Jew programming to a much too large and great extent; I continue to pray for ur soul. Apollonian
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Hitchens
Christopher Hitchens is an atheist.
But of course, in your mind, anyone who disagrees with you is a Jew or "Jew lover."
Whatever.
Oh, and great move to attack the messenger rather than the message.
Yeah right Jew; hey, don't forget we already caught u red-handed telling ur stupid Jew lie about how Danish Cartoons were not "affiliated" with Jews. U're so insane--u continue to think u fool anyone but the very dumbest. How u people must hate the Internet, eh? Tell us more Jew. Apollonian
Oh yes, and Hitchens being "atheist" is irrelevant, u pathetic creature, BY RACE Hitchens is known Jew whose sympathies are perfectly consistent. Interesting u have nothing else to say regarding my original theses in original posting--it means, presumptively, u acknowledge what I say about Talmud is absolutely true, eh? U're brilliant; pls by all means tell us more. Apollonian
Miss R, Apollonian,
Please, read my position at FREE Speech or The Law of The Jungle?
I disagree with Hitchens and couldn't care less if he's an atheist, or Jew, or Muslim. His position is selfish and arrogant, and more importantly primitive and untenable in a civilized society where we all 'must breathe the same air' if we are to avoid WWIII.
He repeatedly insists on characterizing comity as fear, thereby confirming that the only language he understands is that of FORCE. He merely rejects having it applied to him. Though the opposite he welcomes.
While I do not in anyway encourage threats of violent reprisals, I am neither naive nor dishonest enough to accept that insults as egregious as those are merely an exercise of 'free' speech.
Only the worst kind of coward hides behind a pen, while brandishing a sword.
Case closed - smoking gun - God is great - truth prevails:
http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,,1703500,00.html
The Danish daily turned down the cartoons of Christ three years ago, on the grounds that they could be offensive to readers and were not funny.
In April 2003, Danish illustrator Christoffer Zieler submitted a series of unsolicited cartoons dealing with the resurrection of Christ to Jyllands-Posten.
Zieler received an email back from the paper's Sunday editor, Jens Kaiser, which said: "I don't think Jyllands-Posten's readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them."
The illustrator said: "I see the cartoons as an innocent joke, of the type that my Christian grandfather would enjoy."
"I showed them to a few pastors and they thought they were funny."
But the Jyllands-Posten editor in question, Mr Kaiser, said that the case was "ridiculous to bring forward now. It has nothing to do with the Muhammad cartoons.
"In the Muhammad drawings case, we asked the illustrators to do it. I did not ask for these cartoons. That's the difference," he said.
"The illustrator thought his cartoons were funny. I did not think so. It would offend some readers, not much but some."
The decision smacks of "double-standards", said Ahmed Akkari, spokesman for the Danish-based European Committee for Prophet Honouring, the umbrella group that represents 27 Muslim organisations that are campaigning for a full apology from Jyllands-Posten.
"How can Jyllands-Posten distinguish the two cases? Surely they must understand," Mr Akkari added.
You know I love you, qrswave, but I honestly see this as a question of a society that allows free speech or doesn't. PERIOD.
The cartoons were juvenile, but then they have highlighted a huge problem in the extremist Muslim world.
There are legitimate critiques of how the West treats the Arab world. I am very against the war in Iraq and believe that the treating of the region as an oil fill up station while allowing dictators to run free is a serious problem. There are huge left over problems with colonialization.
But NONE of that explains the Muslim reactions to the cartoons, which were very well timed, btw.
We cannot and SHOULD NOT live in fear of "offending" anyone.
A few months ago, South Park aired an episode which featured the Virgin Mary bleeding out of its ass. Did you see mass rioting around the world? No.
In fact, if you go by mere degradation, then the Africans should be rioting every day, as economic genocide is occurring in the region. They don't riot.
Saudi Arabia is one of the richest countries on earth. Iran is incredibly oil rich. Diplomatic solutions to any "offense" that was taken to the cartoons were very possible. And yet there's still the claim that this is the "last straw" of the extremist Muslims and in fact they had no other choice but to riot and pillage.
Whether the purpose of the original publishing the cartoons was to offend (which I don't even think it was), it's irrelevant. We have moved beyond the original purpose.
This is not about the cartoons. It's about extremists who will kill when their religion is criticized, even a little. (see Salman Rushdie, Pim Fortuyn, and Theo Van Gogh)
Free expression is at risk. We now live in a world that's terrified of offending one particular group of people. Iran is running a Holocaust cartoon contest, and yet you don't see Jews or Israelis rioting in the streets. This is ONE extremist sect of a religion and ONE group of people that UNIQUELY react in this way.
How we deal with this is a question that I do not know the answer to.
Miss R,
Israel reacted very courageously to the quadraplegic Sheikh Yassin - throwing a missile on his car. He never killed anyone - just provoked :)
Irael sends out squads to kill and kidnap ex-German soldiers who were only carrying out orders from superiors.
4 contractors were killed in Fallujah and US razed the whole city to the ground - hmmm . . .
Japanese army was not surrendering and causing a lot of casualties . . . so
US bombed al-Jazeera offices deliberately and was thinking of bombing their head office.
Gimme a break from this Muslim anger . . . just wish they don't get their hands on mechanical guided missiles.
How we deal with this is a question that I do not know the answer to.
What we must do is take a holistic approach and come to realize the fundamental interconnectedness of all things.
Miss R, you know I love you, too. But, your characterization of the cartoon as 'juvenile' is wholly inaccurate.
The cartoon was extreme, and it got an extreme response - exactly what it aimed for.
And the idea that "We cannot and SHOULD NOT live in fear of "offending" anyone" is false on its face.
If I did not conduct myself, as I should, by respecting your most treasured beliefs for fear of offending you, I would lose your friendship and your respect.
Thanks, for opening this much needed and most important discussion. I agree with you; we must address the other legitimate grievances that millions of people around the globe have, Muslim or not. But, the question of mutual respect for sacred beliefs is of paramount importance to all people, not just 'extremists.'
Thanks, Akber, for including the info on the cartoon depicting Jesus which they rejected and your other well-taken points.
Thanks, dirk. You're right. We are all interconnected, when we hurt eachother, we hurt ourselves.
Comrades, ck out judicial-inc.biz if u want a brilliant presentation of the real facts. This guy (at judicial-inc.biz) is absolute genius for his clear presentation simple and honest, featuring literal slide-show presentation and some, but only limited written text, essentially captions for the lurid, but still informative, illustrations given. So when he makes mistake, u can well and easily see; and he tries, too, as with mostly excellent citations and references, though with some notable failures as when he says George Lincoln Rockwell was Jew.
Note again all of this (above-discussed) activity is deliberately overblown, esp. given our present massive attn (as herewith): but we shouldn't be distracted.
WE'RE BEING FED WAR-HYSTERIA to not merely intimidate, but be outrightly TERRORIZing for us.
For here's the (obvious) program: All this propaganda is mere prelude to next TERRORIST EVENT to be perpetrated by same CIA-MOSSAD, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) traitors-murderers-conspirators (the Judeo-"Sadduceans"--like Falwell, Robertson, Limbaugh, O'Reilly, et al.) who've colluded and conspired so brilliantly to keep the people distracted fm the 9-11 outrage and subsequent mass Jews-media coverup (among other things, of course).
Next step is nuclear annihilation of Iran--unless we can try to interrupt things by impeaching the entire crew-conspiracy, the Judeo-"Sadduceans"--nearly all present Dems and Reps in Congress, except say, for Ron Paul, a fellow Texan who seems to be honest as politically practical, given the circumstances.
Paul could be named interim president, the Senate replaced by original elections of Senators by state legislatures.
For note: the obvious strategy is ORWELLIAN PERPETUAL WAR FOR PERP. PEACE; they absolutely must keep US DISTRACTED AT ALL COSTS, one step after another, they not able to afford the people to catch their breath.
Again note how David Ray Griffin in his latest exposition, "Why Official Account CANNOT Be Believed," totally and definitively exposes these horrific murderers--for the WTC buildings were UNQUESTIONABLY demolished by means of professional, especially and specifically EXPLOSIVE, techniques--so obviously actually, the conclusion fairly screams.
(NYC firemen's testimony--hundreds and hundreds of them--absolutely confirm there were dozens and dozens, if not hundreds, of explosions, major and minor, of classic demolition-type which brought towers down. This is still spreading, testimony out now only since Aug 05.)
Actually too, I absolutely and decisively agree with dear "Dirk," above: the "interconnectedness" is actually CONSPIRATORIAL in perfect form--according to New Testament Conspiracy Theory-Analytic-Template.
Keep up ur good work bloggers of America; u're best thing, best hope we got. U too, qrswave. Apollonian
Question: WHAT makes these cartoons so different (and vastly more offensive) than the Virgin Mary bleeding out of its ass in South Park, other than a heckler's veto?
Can ANYONE articulate an actual difference??
Note the Jew, above, just wants to continue blabbing, "Virgin Mary bleeding out of its ass"--evidently by way of provoking and outraging Christians. U're insane Jew, and I truly pity u like good Christian. Apollonian
I didn't make up this image. Point of fact, Matt Stone and Trey Parker were the ones who created the image and included it in South Park. Blame them, complain to them, if you are so upset.
Not at all ("upset")--actually I just find it interesting to see what holds ur Jew interest as u think is notable to be pointed out to all the other bloggers out here in blogger-land. Do u think maybe u've somewhat lost the thread of discussion for this blog? I have 30 credit hrs in psych, 6 at grad level. Apollonian
Miss R,
I would find the cartoon you described extremely offensive and I condemn it in the strongest terms.
Apollonian, I am asking you once and for all, stop the personal attacks and refer to my friend Miss R by her handle and not by your incessant and defamatory use of the word "Jew."
I ask you again to keep your comments free from personal attacks and generalized condemnation of any group of people. Stick to substantiated assertions. Stop giving me and my contributors a hard time.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Qrswave,
The point is that Christians, even if offended, can laugh at themselves.
Why can't Muslims?
Moreover, you should have seen the episode, it was hysterical. (and the show also offends Jews all the time and featured Cartman dressing up as Hitler, appolonian, who is clearly looking for a fight)
Satirical and offensive to some (even many) images are a protected and valued part of our tradition. Muslims are not being so shockingly targeted compared to any other group. I would hate to see this debacle cause us to lose the first amendment right to parody, even tasteless and offensive parody.
See: Hustler Magazine v. Falwell.
Well gee whiz, I thought I was "contributing," u know? And, at least I'm honest eh?
U mean to say I can't claim w. u that truth is its own defense regarding ur allegation of slander?--if u're wrong (in fact, as about Jews and Talmud) and I'm right, then doesn't that mean u're slandering poor me?
Look, if I've told a lie--tell me what it was, and I'll immediately say at least 7 thousand penitential "Our Fathers," truly.
So tell me, how's life?--have u ck'd out anything expository on the Talmud?--so u have an idea as to what u pretend to talk about? Did u ck judicial-inc.biz? How is "Jew" defamatory, unless there's something wrong w. being Jew, eh?--pls explain.
Don't u remember how I so nobly urged u not to censor our poor "crackhead" correspondent fm back in the MLK blog? So was ur "friend" lying or not when alleging I'm for censorship?
U "condemn" way too much qrswave, incredibly self-righteous: do I lie to u constantly, like ur so-called "friend," who always speaks down to u, as if being a "voice" fm on high?
Notice how u constantly enjoy threatening and terrorizing poor me for my free expression, demanding censorship (self-censorship).
Why not just cut the fish-wife admonitions and screechings and let my substance speak for itself? (I don't think of it as "personal attacks," rather as honest characterization, fully verifiable, eh?) The purpose of ur blog is information, right? For example, I've told u all about the Talmud, right? Have u done the basic courtesy to ck it out? IF U HAVEN'T DONE THIS BASIC RESEARCH, DO U REALLY HAVE ETHICAL GROUNDS TO BE SO INTIMIDATING, HECTORING, AND GENERALLY OBNOXIOUS?
Do I make a substantial case against Talmud hence Jews, or not? Come on, try to be American and somewhat patriotic, true to freedom, free-speech, and truth. Repent. Apollonian
I never said the Brits are okay to censor the woman arrested in London or that the Americans should censor that.
Au contrare.
But I am sorry, even Woody Allen has made jokes about the Holocaust. You don't see calls for his death.
Somehow one group can rationally deal with comments and images, another cannot.
Images of god? Have you seen Arrested Development? Watch the "In Gob We Trust" episode, lampooning god/hashem himself.
South Park has Jesus as a reality TV character.
The point is that the religion grows and matures when it can and does respond to such images without resorting to violence.
What makes Mohammed so much more untouchable than Jesus Christ? Please explain.
Very cogent and incisive "Jedi" of "RedEye"-ness. Observe Jews now got Ernst Zundel (ever hrd of him?--ck ihr.org and zundelsite.org), G. Rudolf, and David Irving (who's actually a Jew himself) in jail for denying the idiotic holohoax which is just Jew religion imposed upon us gentiles. Jews are liars to the very core of their essence and essence of their cores too. Now u see the purpose of New Testament--to warn us against these dread, odious, and noxious creatures of subjectivism, narcissism, hubris, hystericism, and insanity (though a sublime insanity that actually works under certain conditions--like the Spenglerian "Decline of the West").
Keep up ur good work, comrade. Apollonian
What constitutes "respect"? Isn't that arbitrary? One person will find one thing respectful and other things not respectful.
And yet you think it's okay to question the Holocaust as free speech. Why is that not entitled to respect? Why the arbitrary line?
Moreover, why exactly are you limiting this to religion? Why not also respect political icons? Isn't that also "disrepectful."
Don't you see the problem with drawing such arbitrary lines?
Just because people overreacted doesn't mean the original work isn't part of an acceptable dialogue.
the prophet Muhammad should be respected just as the prophet Jesus should be.
Anything less is antisocial and the furthest thing from 'free' since it hurts billions of people across the globe.
But the problem is how do u know it really "hurts" them?--couldn't they just be bluffing w excuse to complain and extort? And hey, Christ was the Son of God himself, so u know he wasn't kidding about those insane Pharisees/Jews (descendents); ck JOHN 8:44. "Antisocial" is ur questionable opinion, qrswave, ur excuse for fascism and censorship, eh? U're funny--and I mean like anything but logical. Repent. Apollonian
I'll throw in my 2 cents.
I can't really believe that the killing and protesting going on is strictly due to these cartoons, but that could be my naivete (sp?)
I think there is an overall feeling right now of angry and mistrust and a growing hatred for US based on our actions. This hatred maybe has spread to other "white" or Christian folks and their countries.
I think we don't see that here because we haven't had this long term build up of this hatred and discrimination that they feel.
But as things progress here, cartoons are failing to be funny to me. Not yet to the point of protest, but just wait until we are at war with Iran or the dollar begins collapsing and as the masses here realize their complete helplessness and lack of control and are scared for their lives....then this level of protesting will be going here too and it may be over a cartoon, or who knows what. Whatever match hits the fire at that time.
And once rioting and protests begin then others utilize the situation to their ends. For example, Rodney King riots in LA. Once this began and people saw it on tv they wanted some of the action and then participated in the looting.
Otherwise, I agree with Miss R. This comes down to freedom of speech. And I agree with QRSWave that of consideration people can "choose" whether or not to do things that might offend others. But I do not believe this should be legislated.
Morality can not be legislated.
Post a Comment
<< Home