 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 204 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2613449 Today 2 Topics 127500 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Definitely one of the best orators of our time. Whether I find myself agreeing with him or not on various issues, it's always a pleasure to hear him express himself and his ideas. He's definitely got the right end of the stick on certain parts of politics and sociology. Any other fans of his on here? Here he is on , the "thieving, fanatical Albanian dwarf". Hahah |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I admired the guy and admire the bravery of some of his work. Plus he was fun, a real character. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Good to hear! Yeah he was a seriously funny fucker. I'd punch a pope to have a pint with him were he still alive |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Ha ha! But which pope? I kind of like the new one. I mean compared to what i've seen during my lifetime, i enjoy the fact he's trying to keep with the times and adapt to modern society. Still, i'm no pope fan. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
This pope is actually not bad, would have been interesting to see Hitch's reaction to him. Peter Hitchens is a twat though |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Seeing him in that Google advert was quite a striking moment for me. (the pope, not the 'inferior' brother) Big deal you might think but i just sat there, motionless and mouth gaping like one of hecane's delicacies. Something happened there. Connections in my brain were firing. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
hexane* ( i knew i'd fuck it up) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I'd line about 5 of them up, heads touching, and hope for some collateral damage. Starting with Darth Sidious. Yeah, the modernisation of the Catholic church will hopefully lead to them halting and taking responsibility for their awful, unforgivable deeds that they're still getting up to. Tis one of those things that seems decades and decades away, but could well get uprooted quickly if enough key people are disturbed and ousted. Here's hoping! Less poping |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it's sad i don't have the linguistic ability to explain to you how much he would hate you for this. what is more annoying is that as a pacifist if he was alive he would kick the shit out of you for being so fucking stupid. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Christopher Hitchens started to lose a lot of his "fun" character when he went all pro-Iraq war. He sort of turned into a fat alcoholic uncle, burping about them evil muslims. And remember when he said waterboarding wasn't torture? To be fair, he did do a complete 180 on that, after Vanity Fair made him undergo actual waterboarding for an article. Still, it amazes me that an intellectual like Hitchens could read the description of waterboarding, and even contemplate that it might not be torture. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
lol you quoted Vanity Fair. i am like so tempted to like diss you? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
From the name it sounds odd, but vanity fair has had some award winning articles in journalism over the years |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Awarded by whom? You? In your sordid little |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Oh, you. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
It looks like a still from a '90s Nine Inch Nails video. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Dig deeper babycakes and you'll find more fun stuff ;) Nothing that I'm not aware of. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"It looks like a still from a '90s Nine Inch Nails video." I have no clue what it was from. I didn't even know I had caught the hand until Tue next day or so. I thought it looked cool. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Aw shit... Hitch wouldn't like me? Tell me what else he'd think, I've wanted a good source on his opinions since he's been dead |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
His extreme nature did tend to make him take stances i thought didn't fit with most of his thinking. Anyway i'm no Hitchens Scholar. What about his atheist matey friend now gone all agnostic? *quick google* Ha ha i only needed to type "Hitchens and" to find him: Dawkins! I like him but sometimes his emotions will wreck any sense of stability he's trying to dish out. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Dawkins is alreet, he's an odd mix of stiff and weak, a scholar and a handbag. I think the whole atheist/agnostic distinction is a bit blurry anyway. Nobody can yet claim disproof of a deity, so agnostic is probably the most rational nomenclature if one wants to adhere to evidence-based beliefs. On the other hand, even if we were to discover and exhaustively explain the physics behind the origins and fate of the universe, anybody could still claim that "behind" it all was a deity operating in a purely metaphysical sense. So in that light you could kind of interpret agnosticism as a placeholder stance until atheism is logically unquestionable. The funny thing is that if a lot of monotheists went very hardcore and dropped all the circus act and tics of their religions, they'd be left with a fundamentally unshakeable proposition that's really very Tao: God is everything. Now if somebody were to come to my door and word that slightly differently, say, "divine is everything", I'd very well consider having them in for a cup of tea and a chat. The holy entity concept is outright insulting when contrasted with the idea that everything is inherently wondrous and fanciful as it is. Space, tits, war, music, wave packets, cells, language, gypsies... It's a bit intense to say the least |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
'when he went all pro iraq he was drunk and fat and wrong' didn't galloway say something just like this? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
so when he does christianity for being a fascist oppressive cult you like. but when he says it about ultra right wing islamic movements he's stupid and also had too many pies? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Can't you just click on the number next to the username of the poster you're replying to? For a 'thinker' it's not that fucking hard is it? I just feel it's a waste of time when i have to scroll up to Jeff Mozart's post just to be sure. It's just a click, AMPI MAX. Sorry, that was a bit of a silly moan but for fuck's sake get a grip Chomsky fearer! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Why can't we have a cooking show with a cartoon snake chef named Hisstopher Kitchens? come on guys we can do this |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
In its obituary, the New York Times quoted Hitchens' friend Ian Buruma, who told the New Yorker in 2006 that Hitchens was "always looking for the defining moment — as it were, our Spanish Civil War, where you put yourself on the right side, and stand up to the enemy." He shared that impulse with George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, and Paul Wolfowitz, and they found their moment in the stupid decision to invade Iraq. For Hitchens, it was the opening maneuver in a grand, imagined clash of western civilization against the Islamofascist hordes. It was something else for 113,000 civilians who died in the chaos unleashed. The great tragedy of Hitchens' life was that, toward its end, he aligned himself so stridently with the very fools, cowards, and charlatans who most desperately invited exposure by his prodigious skills as butcher. How can someone who devoted so much of his life to as noble a cause as destroying the reputation of Henry Kissinger blithely stand shoulder to shoulder with Rumsfeld? this is the usual populist unthinking ignorance u hear about hitchens and iraq. just thought id let you know. usual. populist. everyone thinks this. gawker. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I was waiting for this and i knew it would be posted by you! :) Who would win a fight between Hitchens and Chomsky, AMPI? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the one who says that the pictures of bosnian concentration camps were faked by western government loses the fight, russell. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Lol I hope you're alright. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yeah but Saddam's Iraq and Islamofascism are totally different. Saddam's Ba'ath party was secular as fuck, it was a total joke that the two could ever have been allied I really like the term "islamofascism", it perfectly describes how religious and national extremism are effectively indistinguishable. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
During different time periods, ANO has been sponsored and supported (with safe haven, training, logistical assistance, and financial aid) by Iraq, Syria, and Libya. Indeed, from 1974 until the early 1980s the organization was headquartered in Baghdad. baathist regimes and major dictatorships worked with terrorists all the fucking time. whoever says secularist dictatorships don't cooperate with religious fanatics is just wrong. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Abu Nidal are secular pan-Arab nationalists, exactly like the Ba'ath and Fatah. Arabs have been having a pop at Israel since it was created for nationalist reasons, not religious ones. They are islamofascist in the same way as the FLQ and IRA are catholofascist (i.e., not) Hamas are islamofascist though, as are all the Al-Qaida spinoffs in Syria and Iraq (obviously), and maybe the Brotherhood too |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Unfortunately I don't understand him when he speaks. Something with his accent |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ahk shit! sry i had gotten the idea you didn't believe iraq supported terrorists or something. very sorry. no you are absolutely right. as far as i know the palestinian terror groups back in the 70s/80s were not very religious (they were often muslims but the terrorism itself wasn't 'islamic' i think). the tactics were hostages and political demands. terrorists used threat of violence to pressure governments into releasing prisoners or withdrawing from territory ect ect |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
didn't saddam support hamas. there was that whole thing of him 'donating' money to families of suicide bombers? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ok drillrods i found this in my bookmarks look Author Richard Miniter reported on September 25, 2003, that U.S. forces had discovered a cache of documents in Tikrit, Saddam's hometown, showing that Iraq had given both a house and a monthly salary to al Qaeda member Abdul Rahman Yasin The Duelfer Report’s conclusion that Iraq did not possess stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction when the invasion began overshadowed its other disturbing contents. It confirmed that Iraqi intelligence trained terrorists from around the Arab world at Salman Pak, a “counter-terrorism” training camp that housed a Boeing airliner to simulate hijackings. Iraqi defectors who were at the site noticed the similarities of the exercises to the 9/11 attacks. According to reporter Stephen Hayes, about 2,000 terrorists were trained every year since 1999 at three camps. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i don't like frontpagemag. tell me if this info isn't too good. anyway im not making a case for the bush war. i'm telling you baathist dictatorships don't mind supporting radical islamists. secular governments can work with violent religious nutters. america backing the mujahideen could even be a good example |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
old article to make up for linking to horowitz. sorry for linking to horowitz. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
drillrods i'm not sure about this. the only sources that talk about salman pak and foreign terrorist connections like ansar al islam are from the stinky right wing websites. left wing websites say the defectors from iraq are unreliable and that salman pak was a counter terrorism training camp (mostly due to what scott ritter says). there seems to be only ONE story on salman pak in the gaurdian archives (the observer article below) and it's from before 2003 (a now rare example of unbiased writing). i usually rely on the left to clue me up but they havn't actually talked about salman pak which has made me furious. i'm saying to treat me as if im wrong until i find a decent article/essay on this which may be never. but PLEASE be careful about believing the left on this. Charles A. Duelfer, chief weapons inspector in Iraq, reported that as recently as three months before the March 2003 invasion, "a branch of the Iraqi Intelligence Service known as M14, the directorate for special operations, oversaw a highly secretive enterprise known as the Challenge Project, involving explosives ... [that] trained Iraqis, Palestinians, Syrians, Yemeni, Lebanese, Egyptian and Sudanese operatives in counterterrorism, explosives, marksmanship and foreign operations at its facilities at Salman Pak, near Baghdad. (i believe duelfer more than the cia) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
one last thing. another member of the iraq survey group Richard O. Spertzel describes the media as having not understood the findings of the duelfer report. the original article on WSJ asks you to subscribe or log in so i linked to freerepublic. anyway i hope u read some of this stuff. It is asserted that Iraq was not supporting terrorists. Really? Documentation indicates that Iraq was training non-Iraqis at Salman Pak in terrorist techniques, including assassination and suicide bombing. In addition to Iraqis, trainees included Palestinians, Yemenis, Saudis, Lebanese, Egyptians and Sudanese. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
