| Je t'adore
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 4:14 PM
|
In the midst of an otherwise dull interview with Christian Magazine The World Christopher makes this rather astonishing comment.
"Following his own standard on the civic minimum, however, aligns Mr. Hitchens with a president he says he doesn't particularly like. "He's not my type" says Mr. Hitchens, but he says that he "adores" first lady Laura Bush "
For the first time in many years I am speechless.
Update
Thanks to Ryan in the comments for pointing out that Christopher's very public admiration of Laura Bush is not a new phenomenon.
From Newsbusters
"HITCHENS: "It must be to his credit he (the President) got Laura Bush to marry him. She's an absolutely extraordinary woman."
MAHER: "Oh, come on. That's like Hitler's dog loved him. That is the silliest reason ..."
HITCHENS: "I think tomorrow you might be sorry you said that. Laura Bush is very gentle and talented."
With rumours circulating that the Bush Marriage may be in trouble, perhaps Christopher is hinting that his shoulder is available if Laura needs somewhere to cry?
updated update
If only I could write headlines as well as the good people at Wonkette.
Drink-Soaked Former Trotskyist Popinjays, and the Women They Love |
|
 |
|
|
|
| Outrage
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 2:14 PM
|
"Here's the smell of blood still. All the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand"
You might think that in the week in which it has been revealed that US troops went on the rampage in Haditha killing 24 civilians, including children as young as one, that Christopher as one of this wars leading cheerleaders would have taken the opportunity of his weekly Slate Piece to comment on this atrocity.
Well if you did think that you would be wrong. In Hitchensworld the "outrage" of the week is not the massacre, oh no, instead it is a comment made by British MP George Galloway
I'm not going to waste too much time on this badly written screed of fake indignation, in which surprisingly enough Christopher fails completely to link to what Galloway actually said. The original article is not online but this BBC report gives us the key quotes and also Galloway's clarification.
"Like the prime minister's wife commenting on suicide bombings in Israel I understand why such desperate acts take place and why those involved might believe such actions are morally justifiable.
"From the point of view of someone who has seen their country invaded and their family blown apart it's possible, of course, for them to construct a moral justification.
"But I've made my position clear. I would not support anyone seeking to assassinate the prime minister.
"That's why I said in the interview I would report to the authorities any such plot that I knew of.
"What I did make abundantly clear to Piers Morgan in the GQ interview is that I would like to see Tony Blair in front of a war crimes tribunal for sending this country to war illegally and for the appalling human consequences which resulted. That's what I will continue to press for."
Seems fair enough to me and hardly "incitement to murder" or even an "incredible catalog of indecency"
Christopher finishes with one of his trademark rhetorical questions.
"How long before the democratic left starts to refuse him a platform and make him stand on his own? Some of us will be watching."
I'd merely like to say that in the week when the true horror of the occupation of Iraq became clear, why should we care about the hysterical demands of one of the men that made this whole disaster happen. What is he going to do, start writing nasty things about us? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The boy can't help it
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 2:34 PM
|
As I neared the end of this article on memorial day I was actually thinking, good piece not much for us to disagree with here. However I forgot the pathological virus coursing through our hero's veins which means that he cannot write a whole piece without bashing the left, viz.
"Since all efforts at commemoration are bound to fall short, one must be on guard against any attempt at overstatement. In particular, one must resist efforts to ventriloquize the dead. To me, Cindy Sheehan's posthumous conscription of her son is as objectionable as Billy Graham's claim, at the National Cathedral, that all the dead of Sept. 11, 2001 were now in paradise. In the first instance, we have no reason to believe that young Casey Sheehan would ever have supported MoveOn.org
No doubt his mother would have had no idea what Casey Sheehan thought, best to ask someone like Christopher who never actually met him.
However I want to look again at the phrase "ventriloquize the dead"
It's a retread of course, Christopher likes it so much he has used it a number of times. However while he loves the phrase he seems curiously unable to resist his own bit of ventriloquizing.
See for example this in which the corpse of Aneurin Bevan is disinterred to provide a justification for the war in Iraq.
Then we have Orwell of course, Orwell's supposed support from beyond the grave of the Iraq invasion has been a pretty constant theme of our Christophers (see for example here) but lets not forget some other ghostly supporters of Mr H's evn including, off all people,Leon Trotsky
I could go on, but lets leave the examples there. In Christopher's view a mother who has lost her son and then decided to campaign against the war that killed him is "a flake" while those who sent him to die are the inheritors of the tradition of Orwell and Trotsky.
Christopher finishes with a peon to some of the US dead in Iraq and reminds us "every man and woman among them was a volunteer" on this day lets also recall some of the dead who were never asked if they wished to volunteer for Christopher's glorious little war.
   |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Slated
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 5:11 PM
|
If you ever wondered why, of all the outlets available, Christopher writes for Slate then this quote from editor Jacob Wiesberg, might provide part of the answer.
"Another aspect unique to Slate is that its editors don’t believe in fact-checking. “We think it makes authors lazy and careless,” says Weisberg. “We like writers to be responsible for their facts. And we’ve also discovered that on the Internet, and particularly since the advent of blogging, mistakes get found out very quickly. So there’s a huge disincentive to making mistakes.”
Perhaps I need a new masthead slogan; Hitchenswatch, doing Jacob Weisberg's job for him since 2005!
(via BTC News) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Fear Factor
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 2:19 PM
|
She might look cute but she plans to take over the world!
From a recent interview.
"It happens, also, within our societies . . . local authorities very often, in their multicultural programs, make the assumption that the place to go [in response to these clashes] is the mosques and the imams . . . So we are colluding in our own destruction in this, I think. The next thing will be to ask for separate Muslim schools, and then separate Muslim schools for girls, and then separate sporting facilities and then separate courts"
Outrageous Muslim schools! the very idea. Imagine the nightmare state we would be in if we had ended up with a society that tolerated christian schools or even worse Christian single sex schools. Can anyone conceive of what it would be like if we allowed christian priests to officiate in legal ceremonies like, oh I don't know, weddings?
. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Dutch Courage
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 7:00 PM
|
Just when you thought it was safe to leave the issue of Ayaan Hirsi Ali Christopher returns to the well
Not totally unexpected I suppose, the other big story of the week, Iraq's new "government" is probably an issue that Mr H does not want to touch with the proverbial bargepole, and who could blame him? so it's back to a nice bit of eulogising of new hero of the Muslim hating right.
Most of it is a retread of issues which we have discussed ad nuseam below. However a couple of little points may be worth mentioning.
"Dutch courts have already required her to vacate her home as a result of her neighbours' petition to have her evicted, and she was on the verge of resigning her seat in the Dutch parliament and of requesting the right of residence in the United States. But this was not enough to satisfy her critics. A leftist news team in the Netherlands has broadcast an item about the way in which she had initially entered the country."
It seems Christopher has been spending a bit too much time with his neo-con chums and now thinks throwing the word "leftist" around is what the cool kids do.
Of course he manages to avoid mentioning what these evil "leftists" managed to find out, i.e. Ms Ali left Somalia at the age of 4 and had been happily living in Kenya ever since. This is skated over in that typically lovable Hitchens way with the phrase "leftist" being the necessary cover to avoid actually dealing with the substance.
He does manage to concede that Ayaan somehow managed to end up in the same party as the immigration minister deporting her. Yet somehow forgets to mention that this parties policy on refugees (deportation as the standard response to asylum claims, an immigration service geared to rejecting any refugee sanctury, the onus on the refugee to prove their case , any mistake on a claim being immediate grounds for removal, no ablity of third parties such as church groups to assist refugees) were all enthusiatically espoused and supported in the Dutch Parliament by a certain Ms Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
Karma is a bugger isn't it?
The nearest we get to an explanation of this odd behavior from someone who was a refugee herself is this rather lame excuse.
"If she had become the spokeswoman for other refugees, her own story of making a partially false application could (and would) have been used against her even more."
So thats why she became refugee basher in chief, to cover up her own false credentials? now to be honest that's now quite the line I would be using when when aiming for the selfless heroine martyr image ("she had to stitch up other refugees mate or she might have suffered herself!) But hey, I write a little blog and Christopher writes for Slate, what would I know?
Otherwise thats about it, there is the now obligitory reference to evil muslims taking over the world (" she pointed out that many perfectly legal immigrants to Holland were trying to import dictatorship rather than flee from it" which is as bizzare a statement as you are likely to hear this week) and a forthcoming dinner invitation will be winging it's way to Ms Ali on touchdown at Dulles international it seems"It will be delightful to have Ayaan Hirsi Ali in Washington
However the funniest bit of the whole recycled screed is the ending.
"a woman who has also redefined that old expression "Dutch courage."
Now correct me if I am wrong here but is Dutch courage not that false feeling of heroism you get from Drinking too much?
I'll leave it there.
Update
Sometimes we can be a little hard on Christopher, so just for some balance lets lo ok outside our bubble and see the quality of postings some of his supporters can create!
The Mole
"Hitchens provides an update on the exile of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Haven't read it yet, but I have no doubt he delivers like always.
One day I might be as good as that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| What a funny guy
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 2:54 PM
|
What do you mean by funny?
"the Celeste Bartos Forum was packed for “Revolution: A User’s Manual.” Late arrivals bickered over the remaining places. The beautiful people--Salman Rushdie, Padma Lakshmi, Martin Amis with a cunning little flip to his hair in back--slipped into their reserved seats in the front row. Then the revolutionaries hit the stage, led by moderator Christopher Hitchens. This was a genuinely impressive group: Adam Michnik, Gioconda Belli, G.M. Tamas, and Baltasar Garzon. As they arranged themselves onstage, Hitchens addressed the crowd: “Please hold your applause, all praise belongs to Allah.” This produced a ripple of uneasy laughter"
(from here)
I tell you Hitchens is wasted doing politics, with lines like that he should be headlining comedy festivals! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Minding your language
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 8:11 PM
|
Remember this little jibe Christopher threw at Juan Cole?
" I can't believe his Persian is excellent, because his English is lousy, he is a complete dim bulb.... he writes as if he's drunk....I think it's illiteracy'
Well it seems someone at the University of Pennsylvania is none to impressed with Christopher's English skills
Recycling dated Mark Steyn articles has become passe it seems, now Christopher is recycling grammer.
Update
Just looked and that site gets 14,000 page views a day, I'm in the wrong business! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Ayaan Hirsi Ali
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 4:37 PM
|
Despite the risk of this site being renamed AliWatch I'll do one more post on Christopher's favourite Dutch ex-parliamentarian.
A reader writes.
"
Ayaan Hirsi Magan, alias Ayaan Hirsi Ali, has no weblog or website
herself. The website in her name is in effect a sub-domain of her
party’s website. There is a weblog called
Ayaan Hirsi Magan, alias Ayaan Hirsi Ali, has no weblog or website
herself. The website in her name is in effect a sub-domain of her
party’s website. There is a weblog called ayaanhirsiali.web-log.nl which is mistakenly assumed to be her blog. In fact it is run by a fan,Sylvia, but Ayaan seems to approve it. It does reproduce almost every
Dutch-language story about Ayaan, and the Dutch-language comments give
an insight into the aggressive xenophobia of her supporters.
There seem to be three phases in Ayaan’s campaigns. The first was about
the position of women in Islam, and especially domestic abuse and
violence. It was inspired by her own experiences, and the stories she
heard when working as an interpreter for the Immigration Service. She is
described as a ‘feminist’ in English-language media, mainly because of
these campaigns, but she has no background in feminist theory, and does
not appeal to it in her campaigns.
The second phase was inspired by Paul Scheffer, a member of the Dutch
Labour Party, PvdA, who wrote a polemic article (and later a book) on
the failure of multiculturalism and ‘integration’ in the Netherlands.
’Integration’ in this context means cultural assimilation. Ayaan became
a fervent campaigner for ‘integration’ and developed her own vision of
what it means, again inspired by her own experiences. Ironically this
campaign led to her leaving the PvdA (she worked for the party
think-tank) and joining the VVD. They rewarded her with a place on the
candidate list - normally that takes 10 or 15 years of party experience
- and she was elected to Parliament.
Her views on immigration and assimilation are not widely reported in
English-language media. German-language media understand them better,
because there are similar issues in Germany. Ayaan became a strong
supporter of the European nationalist ideal of cultural and linguistic
homogeneity. Unassimilated immigrants, for Scheffer and Ayaan, are in
themselves a threat to a society’s existence, even if they are law-abiding.
This is the context for her personal views on being an immigrant, which
are quite unusual, and derive from her own experience. For Ayaan,
emigration seems to be an act of breaking entirely with your past life,
and immigration is a rebirth in a completely new life - where you become
a different person, with different values. Although she does not speak
of it as such, she seems to see it almost as a religious conversion. In
her case all that was true, she has broken with her family and
everything she believed in, and found a new ‘faith’ in Enlightenment
liberalism.
This is why she was so hostile to double nationality, and to immigrants’
links with the home country. It explains why she sees personal freedom
as subordinate to cultural assimilation. It explains her hostility to
satellite television, for instance - in Dutch cities you can see which
apartments are inhabited by Turks and Moroccans, because they have a
satellite antenna. For Ayaan it is simple: if you live in the
Netherlands you watch Dutch-language television. Any ‘enclave culture’ -
even virtual enclaves - damages society. Ayaan is not the only one in
the Netherlands or Germany who thinks like this about assimilation, but
she may become the propagandist for this approach to the United States.
Based on her campaigns, I would guess that she would advocate compulsory
language courses for all immigrants in the United States. She would
oppose the very existence of Spanish-language media there, and insist on
the full cultural assimilation of the large Hispanic minority. She might
propose constitutional amendments to make English the official language,
and the national cultural language. She would say the the United States
is risking its own survival for short-term economic gain, by allowing so
many illegal immigrants - and legal immigrants from poor, rural,
non-Anglophone backgrounds. However, some of the measures she supported
in the Netherlands would conflict with American limited-government
traditions - for instance, the government forbids poor citizens to marry
foreigners, by enforcing an income limit.
Ayaan was also influenced by another academic, Herman Philipse of Leiden
University. This influence did not lead to a direct campaign, it was
more personal: Philipse had written an ‘Atheist Manifesto’ which
inspired Ayaan to break definitively with all religion. In any case, she
never stopped criticising Islam itself.
The concern with Islam itself became dominant in the third phase. In
2005 and 2006, she began increasingly to identify with the kind of
anti-Islamist neoconservatism represented by Robert Spencer of Jihad
Watch. She spent most of her time outside the Netherlands, and was
rarely in Parliament. In the last major newspaper article before the
current scandal (in De Volkskrant, April 8 2006), she compared European
political elites to Chamberlain appeasing Hitler. In the article, she
leans heavily on Bruce Bawer for analysis of what is happening in
Europe. She has also been reading Bat Ye’or, and introduced the term
dhimmi to the newspaper’s readers. She quoted the un-sourced statistic
that there are now 40 million Muslims in Europe, and claims that they
will become the majority and introduce Sharia through the democratic
process. The title of the article was “Confrontation, not
Reconciliation” - throughout it, she translated the English word
’appeasement’ with the Dutch word for reconciliation.
So by now, she is no longer concerned with the Netherlands national
identity, but with the survival of the West as a whole, in a war with
totalitarian Islamism - or simply with Islam, since she calls it a
’totalitarian movement’. This is the language of the manifesto that she
signed in February 2006 with Salman Rushdie and others, and it is the
language of neoconservatism in the United States. That will probably be
the main emphasis of her work at the American Enterprise Institute."
Thanks for that.
Finally our good friends at LGF Watch are tracking the contortions of the racist right on this issue and doing a fantastic job, check it out. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Always go to the experts
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 3:09 PM
|
It's going to take a while to fully parse Christopher's latest Slate piece on Iran but one quick observation seems to be in order.
"Iran is standing on a cobweb network of earthquake "faults" that will, with absolute certainty, produce yet another devastating chain of earthquakes in the next few years.....only the United States could help Iran to design some system of preparation against the seismic horror that impends"
Who could argue with that, especially after Hurricane Katrina showed the unsurpassed abilty of America in responding to natural disasters.
Finally I'm chasing up a translation of the arabic phrase. "Vasalam Ala Man Ataba'al hoda." is anyone can help drop me a line. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| A reader writes
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 1:55 PM
|
A reader "P" sent us some background information on Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
"I see a right-wing campaign developing to ‘save Ayaan’ from alleged
persecution in the Netherlands, so here are some relevant background facts.
Ayaan built her political career on both an anti-immigrant and
anti-Islam platform. Most of her political views are unknown outside the
Netherlands, because they were expressed in Dutch. The extent to which
she took over the xenophobic and nationalistic campaign themes of Pim
Fortuyn is largely ignored in English-language reports.
For instance it is strange to see Christopher Hitchens (Slate, May 8)
presenting her as a defender of individual rights against group rights
and group identities. In fact, Ayaan has emphasised again and again,
that an immigrant must adopt Dutch culture, speak Dutch, adopt Dutch
values, and identify entirely with the Netherlands as nation, and its
national history. She also demanded that immigrants swear allegiance to
the Netherlands Constitution as highest value - a curious demand since
she wants to amend it herself, in order to ban Muslim schools.
For anyone who refuses these criteria, she has consistently said that
they don’t belong in the country. She and her party (VVD) advocate
large-scale deportations, and deportation as a standard response to
asylum claims, which they mainly consider to be a cover for economic
migration. She and her party support a rigid and restrictive immigration
policy, and since they are in government, it has been largely
implemented: the Netherlands is now the most closed country in the EU.
On asylum, the immigration service IND is entirely geared to rejection
of claims. The onus is on the asylum seeker to prove conclusively and
with documents, that they have valid grounds for entry. One mistake on
an application is grounds for rejection. The VVD insists on deportation
of all failed claimants, opposes any amnesty, and opposes any attempt by
third parties (church groups or local councils) to help asylum seekers.
Yet the woman who is demanding all this is a proven liar with a false
passport, who got herself naturalised as a Netherlands citizen under a
false name, after an asylum claim which she falsified to meet the entry
criteria. She studied at Leiden University under her false name and has
a (probably invalid) degree under that name. She got herself elected to
Parliament on that false name and with a false date of birth, in breach
of electoral law. The lame excuse of the VVD is “she told us already”.
But she didn’t tell the voters, and the party didn’t either. And they
apparently didn’t tell the electoral authorities, so now her status a a
Member of Parliament may be in doubt as well.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali doesn’t exist. Ayaan Hirsi Magan invented that name to
cover her tracks when she applied for asylum, and she never corrected it
by officially changing her name, probably because that would mean
admitting the fraud.
In the end, it all came out. Now her fate is in the hands of Rita
Verdonk, the immigration minister, also from the VVD. As it happens,
Verdonk is standing for leadership of the VVD. And what is her sole
claim to fame, the way she will win back the VVD votes lost to Fortuyn?
She is an immigration hard-liner, the toughest immigration minister in
the EU. No mercy from Iron Rita, for false asylum claimants!
So the VVD is in a great dilemma: they have only two political stars,
and for consistency, one of them ought to be deporting the other.
Whatever it does, the party will lose face. Ayaan herself is unlikely to
lose her political support, which comes from approximately the same
people as supported Pim Fortuyn. They will see it all as a left-wing
elite plot, and ignore her failings, just as they ignored Fortuyn’s.
However, this affair might be the signal for her to move to the USA,
which seems to be on the cards anyway.
In any case, the affair is not the Islamo-Fascist Eurabian conspiracy
suspected by Ayaan’s admirers in the USA. If the Netherlands is
unforgiving to lying asylum seekers, then that is partly due to Ayaan
Hirsi Magan herself, and to her party."
Another view here
Update
According to the Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant Ayaan
Hirsi Magan will leave Holland, and start work for the American Enterprise Institute on September 1st.
It's rather ironic that a migrant who decided to support an extreme anti-immigrant party in Holland is now being deported by them, and indeed is falling foul of laws for which she vociferously campained for. It just goes to show that while parties like the VVD are happy to use people like Ayaan for political cover, she was never one of them. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Moving up the charts
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 3:37 PM
|
Our friends at Right Wing News Compile a chart every year of the "favorite columnists" of batshit crazy right-of-center bloggers.
This years results are here
Some good news for our Christopher, he is up from 16th in last years chart to 12th this year, but still down on his 2003 peak of 9th.
Perhaps that explains his new penchant for Muslim bashing, that's always been Mark Steyn's speciality and he manages to to be at #1 in all three surveys.
Got to keep the customers satisfied! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The littlest crusader
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 8:41 PM
|
The Stanford Daily reports on a recent Hitchens' speech, at Stanford University.
The report strongly suggests that this weeks theme (the evil muslims are coming to get us!) is still very much alive.
"“You don’t have to be paranoid, racist or a bigot to take alarm,” (but it helps!)
On Muhammed “Of course, he’s not a prophet,” he said. “He’s an epileptic plagiarist.”
"The Quran — Islam’s holiest book — was full of “evil fairly tales” that were “unimaginably recycled.” (?)
"Hitchens said he has personally expressed concern to British Prime Minister Tony Blair about Europe’s accommodation of radical Islam. He said that some Muslim leaders have said their growing population means they will eventually take control of Europe." (I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall at that meeting...)
"Hitchens told the audience about recent meetings with European scholars concerned about the increasing pervasiveness of Islam on the continent."
When I read this stuff sometimes it worries me. Here is a smart guy with an agenda, an agenda I am deeply suspicious of.
Luckily however we also have another report of the same event which shows us the funny side of Christopher.
"After he gave his short speech on the state of Islam in Europe he took a bunch of questions which were entirely civil and respectful. Then the last question is from a guy who says:
"Explain the contradiction about how the US bombs millions in Japan and that is seen as heroic and morally just, while Osama Bin Laden kills three thousand in New York and he is a criminal."
A loon, right, someone to just smile and ignore? Hitchens exploded, cut the guy off, and became totally upset. He accussed the man of insulting his integrity. It was like a child having a tantrum, and was totally unprofessional and awkward....
Hitchens has some very interesting things to say about the history of European and American relations with North Africa, and his talk was sprinkled with bits of insight. But his overall paradigm is incoherent, and held together by a kind of martyr-like solidarity with oppressed peoples that ignores how the real world functions. And he doesn't help himself when he says things like "New York City is a more dangerous place than Iraq." Yes, he said that, and he also said that when he was in Iraq he worried about the safety of his wife and children back in DC. I'm sorry, but anyone who thinks America is a more violent place than Iraq does not have a firm grasp on reality"
Quite. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Dodgy Elements
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 2:17 PM
|
I got a bit of stick for stating that Ayaan Hirsi Ali is being used by racists as a cover for their bigotry against Muslims. Luckily enough Ms Ali is now on tour in the USA, so we can have a good look at who else, apart from Christopher, supports her.
Firstly, as illistrated by our photo, it seems that Ms Ali and Charles, chuckles Johnston of little green fascists footballs
have a nice mutual admiration society going.
This is not a case of guilt by association, Ms Ali is openly praising LGF and thanking them for their "support" (to find out more about LGF and the loveable racists who dwell there check out the invaluable LGF watch)
Other new chums of Ms Ali include Michelle Malkin and The Jawa Report,
Ms Ali is of course entitled to support who she likes, as is Hitchens. It is interesting however, how more and more often Christopher seems to end up on the same side as the most rabid, racist wingnuts you could possibly imagine.
Perhaps it is just coincidence? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Iranian Apologists
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 4:40 PM
|
One of our commentators below linked to a site that alleged that Juan Cole was in the pay of the Iranian Government.
Now some might argue that this is a insane Macarthyist Witchunt of first order, however sometimes you read statements, in mainstream publications, that are so soft on the Mullahs you wonder who might be paying the bills.
For example
"The recent fuss about the obliteration of Israel is largely bullshit: Ayatollah Khomeini’s call for this has been intoned pedantically and routinely ever since he first uttered it, and it only got attention this year because of the new phenomenon of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the scrofulous engineer who acts the part of civilian president for his clerical bosses. These people (who once bought weapons from Israel via Oliver North in order to fight Saddam Hussein) are cynical and corrupt. They know as well as you do what would happen if they tried to nuke Israel or the United States. They want the bomb as insurance against invasion and as a weapon of strategic ambiguity to shore up their position in the region."
And who is this disgraceful appeaser?
Step forward
Christopher Hitchens, Slate March 6th 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Kicking the cat.
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 2:54 PM
|
Now that Christopher's attempted smear campaign against Juan Cole has fallen flat on it's face (as even his most rabid defenders have been forced to admit that Cole was 100% correct to say that the phrase "wipe Israel off the map" does not appear in the Iranian president's speech)what is a columnist to do?
The answer it appears is to channel Mark Steyn and write a piece about how
the evil muslims are taking over Europe!
The peg of the piece is Ayaan Hirsi Ali, well known darling of the muslim hating right and excellent cover to deal with the obvious charge of racism ("Me a racist? no way! some of my best subjects are black) While Ali used to have some interesting stuff to say, since 9/11 she has become, at best, the tool of some very dodgy elements indeed.
But did I mention she is good looking? Christopher does, with almost girlish prose.
"I never know whether or not it's right to mention, with female public figures, the fact of arresting and hypnotizing beauty, but I notice that I seem to have done so"
We then get the obligitory bit about Theo Van Gogh, and a bog standard collection of the usual racist memes Muslim women subjected to genital mutilation, Dutch police afraid , women and girls imprisoned within their own ghetto, crimes being committed every day by Islamist thugs in mainland Europe, "honor killings", violence and intimidation, bloody foreigners coming over here and taking our jobs-you wouldnt want your sister to marry one I made the last one up but you get the idea.
Christopher's source? a charming little site called Militant Islam Monitor who, as well as linking to, Christopher virtually quotes verbatim (see "In spite of testimony from the Dutch police, who assured the court that the building was now one of the safest in all Holland," and "The residents of apartment complex housing Ayaan Hirsi Ali should consider themselves lucky in that it could be deemed one of the safest places in Holland" from here) He makes up the bit about the Dutch police of course, but we have to have one fib per article don't we?
The site also coins a lovely new phrase Hispanofascist which tells me at least that these guys have quite an agenda other than radical Islam.
So that's about it, after being humuliated over his attack on Juan Cole, Christopher decides to go after a softer target, and what could be an easier group to stick the boot into than powerless immigrants in Europe?
Do us a favour Christopher, next time you are feeling blue just take it out on the cat?
Update
Laura in the comments makes some fantastic points on this subject and has some excellent links, anyone interested in finding out more should have a look |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Fame at last.
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 8:16 PM
|
The New Zealand Listener magazine has published a little profile of me and my humble site.
Read it here |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Hitchens Cole Update
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 5:04 PM
|
While I've been off watching Dolphins instead of Hitchens (and far more pleasant creatures they are to watch I can tell you!) the Cole/Hitchens dustup has pretty much come to a conclusion.
While the right wing war-monkeys are still pretending to crow, most observers have pretty much given up on Christopher's weak smears.
BTC news pretty much covers it off.
Meanwhile thanks to FGFM for pointing us to this.
(Source Spittle and Ink)
I suppose all we can do now is see if Christopher will call it a day and move on to a new, softer target, or if he will try and keep the feud going. No doubt this week's Slate piece will tell us. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Snitchens
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 8:29 PM
|
A slug yesterday
When under attack it's always best to find a sympathetic chum who can be relied on to give you a softball interview. After his disgraceful smear against Juan Cole yesterday (see below) Mr H gets interviewed by far-right douchebag Hugh Hewitt.
Hugh Hewitt interview
Firstly his motivation for the slime.
"some of your listeners may know of Professor Cole of the University of Michigan. He is acclaimed, at least by himself, expert on matters Shiia, particularly, and he also says he's fluent in Arabic, Persian and Urdu. And for all I know, he is. But he's 10th rate, and he's a sordid apologist for Islamist terrorism, and for Islamist terrorist regimes. And I've been on his case for a while"
Christopher has been on Juan Cole's "case" ever since Cole elegently demolished his rationalle for the Iraq war (seehere)
"... that site, not long ago, attacked me in a private exchange, saying that I had claimed to be in Iran interviewing Ayatollah Khomeini's grandson, Sayed Hussain Khomeini in Qum, which I had...I've just felt I had to reply when that was pointed out to me"
Those private exchanges can be damaging to your reputation you know.
"when I'm attacked, I'll tell you what I do. I always reply, if it's a slanderous allegation of that sort, impugning professionalism. And I don't just reply, I reply again and again. I hit back. I mean, people are sorry if they do that kind of thing."
Considering Mr H's vicious style of personal attack one would think he would be able to take it as well as dish it out, it seems not.
"HH: Now how did you come by his e-mail?
CH: Well, people send me these things. I have my methods"
(So now we know, his amazing journalistic method is the people send him things, Sy Hersh eat you heart out)
"Do you believe that your obtaining of the e-mail was ethical?
CH: Well, not to split a hair, but the person who sent it to me should, I suppose, be asked that. I believe that I have a right to keep an eye on a website that circulates gross professional slanders and libels against me, yes,"
So he just got sent it , but he also "keeps an eye" on the site, it sounds to me that there is a lot more to him "being sent" the email than mere chance.
Finally this.
"HH: I wonder, what has happened to the left, Christopher Hitchens, in their confusing of sort of personal attacks and slanders with argument?
CH: Well, I've always thought that attacks of that kind, wherever they come from, were invariably a sign of weakness....The ad hominem is widely and rightly denounced, because it shows a collapse on the part of the person who uses it. They won't reply to your point, they won't reply to your case.
All this from a man, who in the same interview has said of Juan Cole.
"he's 10th rate, he's a sordid apologist, Juan Cole does not know what he is talking about, in any language, I can't believe his Persian is excellent, because his English is lousy, he is a complete dim bulb, what an idiot Juan Cole is, the embodiment of the mediocre, he writes as if he's drunk....I think it's illiteracy"
The words hypocritical, lying, vindictive sneak spring, to mind. I would say that with this, Hitchens has reached a new low. However every time I think he has reached rock bottom, he climbs further down into the sewer.
Oh hold on, I better watch myself, I don't Christopher deciding to make me "sorry"
I can imagine the visit now
"Nice little site you have here buddy, would be a pity if anything happened to it"
Gulp. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Target for Tonight
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 2:58 PM
|
The latest Iraq war sceptic to feel the wrath of Christopher is Juan Cole
According to Mr Hitchens Cole has the temerity to "present himself as an expert on Shiism and on the Persian, Arabic, and Urdu tongues."
You have to share Christopher's scepticism here, after all Cole's list of qualifications and positions (1975 B.A. History and Literature of Religions, Northwestern University, 1978 M.A. Arabic Studies/History, American University in Cairo, 1984 Ph.D. Islamic Studies, University of California Los Angeles, 1984-1990 Assistant Professor of History, University of Michigan, 1990-1995 Associate Professor of History, University of Michigan, 1992-1995 Director, Center for Middle Eastern and North African Studies, University of Michigan, 1995- Professor of History, University of Michigan")
Hardly back up his claims, while his laughable list of Scholastic Awards and Grants(Hudson Research Professorship, Winter, 2003 ; Award for Research in Turkey, May, 1999, International Institute, U-M ; Research Excellence Award, College of LSA, U-M, August, 1997 ; OVPR and LSA Faculty Assistance Fund Grants, June, 1995 ; LSA Faculty Assistance Fund Grant, March 1994 ; Rackham Research Partnership, 1992-93 ; National Endowment for the Humanities, Jan.-June, 1991 ; Office of the Vice-President for Research, U-M (Pakistan), Summer 1990 ; Horace H. Rackham Faculty Grant, Egypt, Summer 1988 ; SSRC/ACLS Post-Doctoral Award, England, Summer 1986 ; Fulbright-Hays Islamic Civilization Postdoctoral Award, Egypt, 1985-86 ; SSRC/ACLS Doctoral Fellowship, Pakistan, India, UK, 1981-83 ; Fulbright-Hays Doctoral Fellowship, India, 1982") makes you wonder why anyone would ask him for any sort of opinion?
I'm sure Mr Cole will be responding soon, and having been a big fan of his web page for quite some time I'm sure he can look after himself. However one phrase in the article made me pause.
"Cole is a minor nuisance on the fringes of the academic Muslim apologist community"
An apologist, in political terms, is normally taken as one who defends an objectionable ideology or group. I note with interest that Christopher is not accusing Cole of being an "apologist" for radical Islamism, or Terrorism, or indeed his pet phrase "Islamofacism" , but of being an apologist for Muslims. It seems pointing out that not all believers in Islam are evil fanatics (as Cole does so well) is now enough to make you Christopher's target for tonight.
Update
Cole Responds and in this hedgehog's humble opinion rips Hitchens to tiny little pieces.... then stamps on them.
Updated update
Hitchens was not drunk shocker!
The fun is continuing as Andrew Sullivan Rushes to the defence of his "good and old friend" by providing a first hand account of Christopher's sobriety at the time of him writing the hit piece on Cole.
Cole retorts "I had so hoped that the purloined email and the bizarre characterization of my argument, and the attempt of this Western journalist who is clueless about reading Persian texts to correct my philology, was the mere result of too many whiskey sours taken too early in the morning.
I see that instead it is mere asininity and lack of character. Thanks to Sullivan for settling the issue"
This one looks like it will run and run.
Cole also mentions a confrontation between himself and Mr H, and mentions that there may be a video.
If anyone has it could they send it in? I'm sure we would all love to see it.
hitchenswatch@gmail.com |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| The Vanishing
|
|
|
# posted by Sonic : 2:11 PM
|
Christopher's screed of support for the Euston manifesto left so many hostages to fortune that it could give us a weeks worth of posts.
Yesterday we highlighted the slight of hand involved in attempting to use an American Professors attack on Bin Laden into "proof" that the left was supporting Al Queda. Today reality blows a hole in another of Hitchens' little points.
In his article Christopher attempts to explain his laughable thesis with the idea that the left needs "a hasty substitute for the vanished proletariat of yore." I wonder if, while musing on the disapearing working class this morning, he happened to look out of his window at the millions of strikers and marchers taking over the streets?
That's part of the strange numerical myopia of the decent left. If you get a million people marching against the war it is meaningless as they are all Saddam loving, Al Queda coddling, islamofacist enabling peaceniks. However if you manage to arrange for 150 people to gather outside the Danish embassy for the right to piss of Muslims then you have struck a glorious blow for freedom (tm)
In this same crazy upside down world Christopher can write about the "vanished proletariat" while seemingly forgetting who is serving his drinks, cooking his meals and looking after his children.
Today in the USA those people are reminding the Hitchens' of the world that they are not to be trifled with and that is more significant that the silly little online wankfest that is the Euston manifesto. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributors |
|
|
Previous Posts |
|
Archives |
|
|
Contact Us |
|
Send tips or questions to hitchenswatch@gmail.com
|
Hitchens Said! |
“The enemies of intolerance cannot be tolerant
.”
|
|
