A contrary man, but a brilliant mind.
He will be missed.

Hitchens was a gifted writer, thinker, and speaker. His proselytizing of reason and sensibility will be sorely missed.

That's what happens when you get a manscape.

He wasn't that great either. I never heard of him.

You never saw his picture on a bubble gum card, penny-ante?

Aw, poor baby.

Will this push Johnny Walker into bankruptcy?

Didn't always agree with him but Spud has read a lot of his work and always found it compelling stuff. He was a snarky, boozy, intellectual with a unique perspective who was always more hit than miss.

Already missed.

RIP.

Be Well.

'I'm a member of no party. I have no ideology. I'm a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason, and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that's all around us.' Hitch

"Will this push Johnny Walker into bankruptcy?"

#7 | POSTED BY JOE

Not as long as that drunken stumble-bum LiverDie sucks air.

The guy who wrote THIS book?

Well? What think you?

The H L Mencken of his generation.

Hitch: It's too bad there is not a heaven.

Honestly he was a mix bag he championed the cause for the war in Iraq and was in favor to take other military actions in the middle east
in this he was horrible. I did not hate him but I cant say I was a fan either.
I guess since he was a atheist I cant say may the peace of God be with him but I can say RIP

Already missed.

RIP.

Be Well.

#8 | Posted by dethspud

I think I'm going to puke.

I think I'm going to puke.

I already did.

Please feel free.

The man was a British neo-con, joining the American bandwagon.

And this is what happens to anger-repressed self-hating neo-cons. All that repressed resentment comes out in cancer.

Lousy person, lousy writer, lousy way to die. Sorry. [shrug]

.... He Wrote & Drank Like a Man Posessed!

**** Hitch thoroughly "Sliced & Diced" CRIMINALS like the Clintons,Bushs and Henry Kissinger...unfortunately for Chris (and everybody else) the US Govt provides Complete Prosecutorial Immunity for all its Top Level SCUM BAGS!!!

...Proost Hitch!

and Henry Kissinger

Why diss Kissinger?

Apart from Ayub Khan (Prez of Pak), Chu Enli and Nixon, he was most instrumental in the US finally having a relationship with China.

If that hadn't back then, you would be much further up shit creek now than you are. Remember WHO is supporting your Dollar?

By dissing a great person like Kissinger, the man just stank of some kind of lefty bitterness or something.

And a lefty turning out to be a closet neocon is just disgusting.

And a lefty turning out to be a closet neocon is just disgusting.

#20 | Posted by Tosser

fuck you!

---lefties-----

fuck me? fuck you!

----closet neocons---------

Hopefully we will be spared his autobiography.
Samuel Clemens' is so unreadable it's a poor doorstop.

The queeran is still 'borrowed' from earlier lies for morons, however.

Spot on for that one.

Love him or hate him, everyone can agree on one thing;

The man could write an interesting phrase or two.

When i saw 'write' i mean, 'see, hear, write, and make it all comprehensible and maddening'.

I know of no higher praise.

By dissing a great person like Kissinger, the man just stank of some kind of lefty bitterness or something.

#20 | Posted by Tosser

Wait a damn minute. I would like to interrupt this thread to say, 'WTF are you talking about'? Why would you be so all into kissinger? What's he ever done for you?

And why would you accuse Hitchens of being a closet neo-con?

Something's fishy here.

Sorry to hear about Hitchens dying. I found much of what he wrote and said with which I agreed and much with which I didn't, and he always made me think and remind me of what eloquence in the written and spoken word can be about.

He will be missed, very much so.

OTOH Dick Garwin was born in 1928.

"Christopher Hitchens's Best Zingers: From Sarah Palin to Barack Obama" (www.thedailybeast.com) is certainly worth a look.

#27 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Thanks, this is worth posting. If for no other reason, just to display how apolitical he was.

ON RELIGION

" To ‘choose' dogma and faith over doubt and experience is to throw out the ripening vintage and to reach greedily for the Kool-Aid."

-- God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, 2007

ON SARAH PALIN

"She's got no charisma of any kind [but] I can imagine her being mildly useful to a low-rank porn director."

-- The Leonard Lopate Show, June 2010

ON HYPOCRITES

"Nothing optional -- from homosexuality to adultery -- is ever made punishable unless those who do the prohibiting (and exact the fierce punishment) have a repressed desire to participate."

-- God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, 2007

ON WOMEN

"Why are women, who have the whole male world at their mercy, not funny?"

-- Vanity Fair, 2007

ON BARACK OBAMA

"The political rhetoric of Obamaism, alas, is even more bloviating at times than Camelot was."

-- Slate, 2009
christopher-hitchens-gal-1991

Ed Kashi / Corbis

ON CATS & DOGS

"Owners of dogs will have noticed that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they will think you are god. Whereas owners of cats are compelled to realize that, if you provide them with food and water and affection, they draw the conclusion that they are god."

-- The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Non-Believer, 2007

ON GEORGE W. BUSH

"[George W. Bush] is lucky to be governor of Texas. He is unusually incurious, abnormally unintelligent, amazingly inarticulate, fantastically uncultured, extraordinarily uneducated, and apparently quite proud of all these things."

-- Hardball with Chris Matthews, 2000

ON THE AMERICAN LEFT

"One of the many problems with the American left, and indeed of the American left, has been its image and self-image as something rather too solemn, mirthless, herbivorous, dull, monochrome, righteous, and boring."

-- Frontpagemag.com, 2004

ON NEWSPAPERS

"Only the aspirants for president are fool enough to believe what they read in the newspapers."

-- C-SPAN, March 1988

ON MICHAEL MOORE

"The laugh here is on the polished, sophisticated Europeans. They think Americans are fat, vulgar, greedy, stupid, ambitious, and ignorant and so on. And they've taken as their own, as their representative American, someone who actually embodies all of those qualities,"

-- MSNBC's Scarborough Country, May 2004

ON RACE IN AMERICA

"In this country, it seems that you can always get an argument going about ‘race' as long as it is guaranteed to be phony, but never when it is real."

-- Slate, January 2008

ON JERRY FALWELL

"If [Falwell] had been given an enema, he could have been buried in a matchbox."

-- CSPAN, April 2009

Thanks for the quotes, Lipzoidial. Hitchens was a quotable bastard.

When he wrote for The Nation, his column was the first thing I read in every issue it was in. I was disappointed when he drank the Iraq War Kool-Aid and quit the magazine, but he continued to write fascinating pieces elsewhere.

#28 | Posted by Lipzoidial at 2011-12-16 07:41 AM | Reply | Flag:

What about his negative quotes on Atheists?

And why would you accuse Hitchens of being a closet neo-con?

"he drank the Iraq War Kool-Aid"....

OK?

What about his negative quotes on Atheists?

You know very well, he was an Atheist.

He won't diss his own belief system now would he? That would be like asking Fossil to calculate the value of Pi to the 100th decimal place in his head. With some luck the effort just might give him an aneurism.

He won't diss his own belief system now would he?

Yes, he would. And did. Hitchens took on his own beliefs as hard as anyone else's.

He won't diss his own belief system now would he? That would be like asking Fossil to calculate the value of Pi to the 100th decimal place in his head. With some luck the effort just might give him an aneurism.

#32 | Posted by Tosser at 2011-12-16 08:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

Yes he has. Many Atheist have definitely dissed Richard Dawkins, basically relegating him to a verbose fool and nothing more when it comes to adequately or accurately criticism theism.

I was just curious as to why devoidlipzoid decided not to include his negative quotes on atheism.

criticism = criticizing

I was just curious as to why devoidlipzoid decided not to include his negative quotes on atheism.

Because he was copy/pasting from a link Doc gave him.

Good at copy/paste, he is.

Give him a link to anti-atheist quotes and he'll copy/paste those too.

Many Atheist have definitely dissed Richard Dawkins

Dawkins is a real scientist.

Most Atheists are not.

Fulfilling his last duty to his children he bows out of the way. 63 years of real living, in this life, the only one that matters. He was the Thomas Paine of his day, taking on all-comers armed only with wit and reason and good scotch. It's a good day to be a charlatan. Grats to William Craig, Al Sharpton, McGrath, Boteach, and all the rest of the hucksters who might now finally be able to come away from a public debate without looking like a Tosser.

He makes the case that the woman kept Indians in misery and poverty so she could teach them to live on hand-outs.
#11 | Posted by Tosser

Mother Teresa also believed that suffering brought you closer to Jesus/God. The more you suffer, the closer you get. That's why she wanted to keep them in misery and poverty. It all makes perfect sense, no?

I miss when "died at 62" was old. At 40, I can't help but feel a bit scared at how young he passed.

Just wait, Kanrei.
It gets worse.

I was just curious as to why devoidlipzoid decided not to include his negative quotes on atheism.

#34 | Posted by ExpsRedemption

devoidlipzoid? silly but nice. to end your suspense, there simply weren't any of those quotes on the page i copied.

How can one believe in nothing and expect that that belief is also not suspect? I have no knowledge of his perception of his own belief. Please tell me, if you know..

I haven't read any of the man's books, but i have read about him and seen many interviews. I have read several of Richard Dawkins books, who describes Hitchens as a high water mark.

Dawkins books are 50% maddening stupidity and 50% brilliant, genius, inspirational and enlightening. My fav is 'Power vs Force', where he applies the 'thoeries' of kinesiology and the lesoons of simple human psychology into a 'how to get ahead' type book.

The part about kinesiology is just pure crap, but the part of the book about the psychology of enlightenment (which is the same as pure love) is something that should be required reading for every human being alive.

"Vanity Fair reports that Christopher Hitchens has passed away. Often frustrating, usually provocative, always brilliant. He added to the culture, and the conversation.

I'm sure I join many in hoping he is in for a glorious, glorious surprise."

without looking like a Tosser.

Hey!

I heard that!

Hitchens would wipe the floor with anyone on the Retort. Hell, he could argue that the earth is flat with an astronomer and still win the debate.

"Hitchens would wipe the floor with anyone on the Retort."

Not sure your fellow libs agree. He was an outspoken supporter of Bush and the Iraq invasion.

"Not sure your fellow libs agree. He was an outspoken supporter of Bush and the Iraq invasion."

I saw Hitchens debate George Galloway on Iraq. And even though I agreed with Galloway, Hitchens won the debate easily in my view.

46--I agree. The man was very good at what he did. I enjoyed reading his articles, whether or not I agreed.

Smart lad to slip betimes away
From fields where glory does not stay,
And early though the laurel grows
It withers quicker than the rose.
-Housman

"Beware the irrational, however seductive. Shun the ‘transcendent' and all who invite you to subordinate or annihilate yourself. Distrust compassion; prefer dignity for yourself and others. Don't be afraid to be thought arrogant or selfish. Picture all experts as if they were mammals. Never be a spectator of unfairness or stupidity. Seek out argument and disputation for their own sake; the grave will supply plenty of time for silence. Suspect your own motives, and all excuses. Do not live for others any more than you would expect others to live for you."
-Hitch

I thought his work with INXS was super good.

He reminded me somewhat of a liberal William F. Buckley. Sharp, quick, and never wrong in his own mind.

Perhaps Iraq was his last chance at adventure for it's own sake.

Many Atheist have definitely dissed Richard Dawkins

Dawkins is a real scientist.

Most Atheists are not.

#37 | Posted by Tosser at 2011-12-16 08:58 AM | Reply | Flag:

Dawkins is a real scientist, this is true, but he has not done any real scholarly work in his field for many years.

Many Atheists are real scientists, real philosophers, real logicians, etc. They attest that Richard Dawkins, outside of his doctoral field, is a dupe, fool, and coward when it comes to physics, philosophy, cosmology, etc.

#52 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2011-12-16 11:38 AM | Reply | Flag: has never done any scholarly work in any field ever

I miss Jeffn.

#52 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2011-12-16 11:38 AM | Reply | Flag: has never done any scholarly work in any field ever

#53 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2011-12-16 11:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

Figures you don't remember me from Tektite II and the formulation of plans for that plane you seem to always be flying around in...

Yes, my comments are sarcastic. It is a strange response you make, as it does not undermine that Dawkins has been inactive in his field, and is disparaged by a number of his atheist friends for being a dolt when it comes to the focus of his popular work surrounding the existence or non existence of God.

#55 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2011-12-16 11:55 AM | Reply | Flag: never worked for Beech either

Lie some more retard.
Laughing at your stupid posts is almost fun.

"you don't remember me from Tektite II "

Jacques Cousteau, Pierre Trudeau, Sylvia Earle, Scott Carpenter I remember.
You were never there liar.

He died too soon. Typically he thought that his own almost certain upcoming demise was a fit subject for writing and talking about and it was. Even when you disagreed with him or thought you did he made you rethink your own position because his position was based on many years as a writer, reader, thinker and journalist in Britain and America. Those experiences and his brilliant writing based on them were always a worthwhile read. It could take a little effort at times to follow his arguments but it was always worth it whether you ended up agreeing with him or not.

He will be missed for all of that. The momory of him will fade over time but never completely disappear. I hope that is true anyway.

You were never there liar.

#57 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2011-12-16 12:00 PM | Reply | Flag: Can't read nor comprehend

Figures you don't remember me from Tektite II and the formulation of plans for that plane you seem to always be flying around in...

Yes, my comments are sarcastic.

#55 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2011-12-16 11:55 AM | Reply | Flag:

Hitch kinda lost me when he quit The Nation over the Iraq war. Hitch HATED Saddam, and you get no defense of the murdered dictator from me. But on matters spiritual, debunking the deity, he was unsurpassed. herm

But on matters spiritual, debunking the deity, he was unsurpassed. herm

#60 | Posted by herm at 2011-12-16 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

I wouldn't make that statement. There were many far better than him. He was good with rhetoric but not too bright when it came to properly understanding or arguing against the matters involved in terms of content.

...he always made me think and remind me of what eloquence in the written and spoken word can be."--Doc

You can't ask for anything more from a writer worth reading, even if you find you don't agree entirely with what he's saying. RIP, Mr. Hitchens.

But thinking hurts my head.

-The Right

RIP - another brilliant mind lost to the world.

"What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof"

Christopher Hitchens

I wouldn't make that statement. There were many far better than him. He was good with rhetoric but not too bright when it came to properly understanding or arguing against the matters involved in terms of content.

#61 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2011-12-16 12:53 PM | Reply | Flag

"I wouldn't make that statement." I would.

"There were many far better than him." Names please.

"not too bright when it came to properly understanding or arguing against the matters involved in terms of content." In your not so humble opinion.

Just because you didn't agree with the guy doesn't mean he didn't "Properly understand matters" just ask the people he habitually schooled in debates whether or not he had a proper understanding of the matters he tackled. Im happy you've decided to challenge his ability to grasp concepts mere hours after his death. How very righteous of you... Sorry I meant self righteous of you.

.... Tosser: "why diss Henry Kissinger" ???

"REGARDING HENRY KISSINGER
A Panel Discussion on the making of a war criminal
This forum was held on February 22, 2001, at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. The conversation was moderated by Lewis H. Lapham, editor of Harper's Magazine, and was broadcast live by C-SPAN.

"Kissinger sanctioned the illegal bombing of Cambodia... Documents recently released by the CIA, strengthen previously-held suspicions that Kissinger was actively involved in the establishment of Operation Condor, a covert plan involving six Latin American countries including Chile, to assassinate thousands of political opponents.... The Spanish judge, Baltazar Garzon, pursued the extradition to Spain of General Pinochet while the former Chilean dictator was in London. Now this same judge is trying to question Kissinger about the deaths of Spanish nationals murdered and tortured as part of Operation Condor. A French judge is doing the same in relation to murdered French citizens... If it ever came to a trial, the prosecution would be hampered by Kissinger's obsession with secrecy. Not only did he execute much of his foreign policy by the back door, when he left office in 1977, he deposited most of his personal papers in the US Library of Congress. They will remain sealed until five years after his death."
Henry Kissinger: Haunted by his past
BBC Online, 26 April 2002

"...it was important to maintain the balance of power in Southeast Asia as the US policy collapsed. Kissinger's policy was therefore to jettison the Lon Nol government, and to replace it with the Khmer rouge. George Bush, as Kissinger's liaison man in Beijing, was one of the instruments through which this policy was executed. Bush did his part, and the result is known to world history under the heading of the Pol Pot regime, which committed a genocide against its own population proportionally greater than any other in recent world history."
"George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography"
by Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin

"I suppose I have the dubious distinction here of being the only member of the panel who's actually worked for a war criminal. I want to respond briefly to some of the comments that were made earlier. Christopher's quite right, I think, that the collusion with the South Vietnamese regime prior to Mr. Nixon's first election was a great Constitutional crime. I wanted to say too, Stanley, that if these transcripts are revealing, please be cautious. One of Tony Lake’s and my assignments after each of the sessions in Paris with Le Duc Tho was to doctor the transcripts so that Henry [Kissinger] would look good for posterity. There was a deliberate and conscious and very elaborate falsification of the record....I would just remind you that though Henry Kissinger's culpability is quite clear, he was never alone. He could not have conducted this savage, heedless, criminal foreign policy by himself. He was surrounded by Kissinger's Kissingers. And they were men who profited personally, materially, in career terms, in terms of reputation, in terms of power, almost as much as he....You must understand, of course, that their proteges populate the new administration. There is a direct genealogical line between Henry Kissinger and the national security apparatus, as it were, of George W. Bush."
Roger Morris
(former member of Nixon's National Security Council, speaking at the above forum)

** (Lots & Lots More of Kissinger's Murderous,Criminal Career is easily accessible on the net!)

Shit, I thought this was Hitchens thread my bad. Kissinger it is.

Just because you didn't agree with the guy doesn't mean he didn't "Properly understand matters" just ask the people he habitually schooled in debates whether or not he had a proper understanding of the matters he tackled. Im happy you've decided to challenge his ability to grasp concepts mere hours after his death. How very righteous of you... Sorry I meant self righteous of you.

#66 | Posted by Alaskan_Guy at 2011-12-16 03:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

He schools based on rhetoric, not knowledge of the actual state of things regarding the topics being discussed.

Craig vs. Hitchens... hitchens is schooled... why? Because he didn't have an adequate understanding of the actual state of things regarding the topics being discussed.

"There were many far better than him." Names please.

#66 | Posted by Alaskan_Guy at 2011-12-16 03:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

In regard to who is better:

Austin Dacey
Peter Millican
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong
Ray Bradley

If Chris Hitchens came back from the dead and said he saw G-d, would he be accused of selling out by Atheists?

#69 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2011-12-16 03:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

Having not seen this particular debate yet I cannot make an informed opinion on who I believe won. Its over two hours long. I will however watch this and thank you for exposing me to it. That being said reading the comments on the youtube page the trend seems to be leaning towards Hitchens as the winner. Granted he did just die and it seems people commented on this debate as a form of grief. However the Hitchens supporting comments reach back further than yesterday.

To me, Hitchens is one of those writers who would take a hundred words to say what could be said in ten words. Many professional writers have a problem of being too verbose.

If Chris Hitchens came back from the dead and said he saw G-d, would he be accused of selling out by Atheists?

#71 | Posted by kanrei at 2011-12-16 03:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

Thats about as big an IF as you can get. But yea probably.

The man could turn the written word and was very good at it. He was a little more stuffy than Paul Krugman but more informal than Bill Buckley. He will be missed.

All dressed up and likely no place to go.

Mr. Hitchens is a grouch--a drunken grouch. He is the drunk at the end of the bar mumbling into his bourbon and writing sad pathetic things about life--his life.

He detested everything, including himself.

Quite sad really.

He deserves a prayer--since no one will give him one--I will.

#69 | POSTED BY EXPSREDEMPTION AT 2011-12-16 03:37 PM | REPLY | FLAG: CLINICALLY RETARDED

#76 | POSTED BY MURPHY AT 2011-12-16 10:29 PM | REPLY | FLAG: DETESTS INTELLIGENCE

#73 | POSTED BY RAY

Many unprofessional lay-person hacks have a problem of exposing their idiocy on an almost daily basis.

For Ray, here's the same thing "less verbose" : You're a moron.

Not so Letus--

He was a guy who walked the Earth with all of its' Greatness--with a giant gray cloud over his head.

He detested everything. He was the picture of 'depression' in the dictionary.

He was the picture of 'depression' in the dictionary.

Correct.

Miserable, self-loathing, in life.... died a miserable way.

Out of sight, out of mind. Ta-ta.

pathetic things ...He detested everything, including himself.

Quite sad

self-loathing, in life.... died a miserable

"Christopher's inner circle, Martin, Ian McEwan, Salman Rushdie, James Fenton, Julian Barnes, comprise more or less the greatest writers in the English language. That's some posse."

This group of titians that called him their friend use to play a game where they would make up the sentence least likely to be said by another of the group. For Hitchens it was, "No sir I don't care how much money you have, I'm not coming to your party".

By all accounts he died early because he lived too much. Too many late nights with friends, too many second bottles...does that sound like the person described by scuMurphy and her flea-ridden dancing partner who presume themselves a fit judge for a person they never met, never respected, never listened to?

and her flea-ridden dancing partner

Shit-eating cockroach.

who presume themselves a fit judge for a person they never met, never respected, never listened to?

Christopher's inner circle.... Salman Rushdie

Case closed.

Tells me everything I need to know. LOL

You do remember I posted here that I knew Rushdie's aunt? If his own family think of him as scum... and this Hitch guy thinks of him as his pal... Well, I can see what camp he belongs to.

I have seen people destroy themselves by drinking, etc.

And I realized, it's not the drinking and the late nights that kill them.

It's their own self-loathing that does the job.

You can drink and smoke all you like and live to be a hundred. But if you have a rotten attitude, with manufactured cynicism thrown in, with a touch of bitterness... believe me you'll get sick.

It doesn't matter what you get... you'll get it.

You think I can't "judge"?

Of course I can.

And I am using your Saint's own standards. Rhetoric and declaring something "scum" just because you got out of the wrong side of your bed. LOL

who presume themselves a fit judge for a person they never met, never respected, never listened to?

And why are YOU defending a person you never met, never read?

Pseudo-intellectualism, is what they call it. LOL

You just want to be seen as well read? Well read in what? Rhetoric? Atheism? How killing a million Iraqis was a good thing? How to fuck up your life and get cancer? Self-pitying much? Boring much?

But like I said... out of sight, out of mind.

The world can do without neocon mouthpieces. Just get sick and go off quickly without the song and dance, thanks? Or is that too much to ask?

#72 | Posted by Alaskan_Guy at 2011-12-16 03:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

When a very influential and respected atheist website makes the statement, "Frankly, Craig spanked Hitchens like a foolish child" without hesitation, you know Hitchens most certainly did not win. Of course everyone has his fans that will support him no matter what, but when the core group of people that are on your side think you were "spanked like a foolish child"... you lost, and big.

When a very influential and respected atheist website makes the statement, "Frankly, Craig spanked Hitchens like a foolish child" without hesitation, you know Hitchens most certainly did not win

No, not true.

All you know is that an atheist website you describe as "very influential and respected" made the statement.

A bit less certainty and a dash more hesitation on your part wouldn't leave you dangling out there like that. But, hey, there must be a net somewhere, right?

ON WOMEN
"Why are women, who have the whole male world at their mercy, not funny?"

Answer: Because they don't have to be! .....and women know for a fact that we will still take them under our wing, cloth them, feed them and shelter them all in the vain attempt that they will still find it funny when we cum in their mouth unannounced.

For Ray, here's the same thing "less verbose" : You're a moron.
#79 | POSTED BY LETUSPREY

Must be a liberal.

#85 | Posted by ExpsRedemption at 2011-12-17 06:47 AM | Reply | Flag

I watched this debate, like I said I would. He was indeed spanked, if not molested. My only excuse for him is either he was hungover/drunk, or jet lagged or all three. He failed big time on this debate. All hats off to Graig, he is good at what he does. Graig is wrong and its unfortunate Hitchens didn't show up to this debate.

Thanx for pointing this out. Thanx again for providing the names I requested.

I feel this was a bad debate for Hitchens and will be used as an example for the crowd that disagrees with his assertions.

Never the less I stand corrected.

That being said I still disagree with Craig on his points and feel I could of done a better job of debating him on them.

"Must be a liberal."

Says the guy who claims to have equal disdain for all ideologues.

Speaking of which, whatever happened to 1Lib?

Says the guy who claims to have equal disdain for all ideologues.

Ideology, by definition, is divorced from reality. It's the political equivalent to theology.

The H L Mencken of his generation.

#13 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2011-12-16 02:10 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

AH>>>YOU MIGHT be stretching that a bit...but maybe not

Hitch: It's too bad there is not a heaven.

#14 | Posted by CaptainNemo at 2011-12-16

SO TODAY he knows if he was right or not...I guess he's either nothing and nowhere, he's been forgiven by a giving God, or he's a little on the warm side.

bottom line..

TODAY HE KNOWS IF HE WAS RIGHT HERE ON EARTH.....

He's dead you stupid idiot.
Of course he still knows more than you do.

i dont give a shit if he's dead or hiding under your bed....fuck him and his horse...

my point of course is that now he know's if he was right or not...cant you just leave it at that or are you always this big of an asshole or does your face just pucker up more in the winter???

(oh oh...thats a good one..oh..)

By dissing a great person like Kissinger, the man just stank of some kind of lefty bitterness or something.

Tosser thinks Kissinger was a "great person"?

LOL 10/10.

Maximum Trolling.

*golf clap*

Be Well.

/Unless you actually believe that in which case you are simply too stupid for words.

SO TODAY he knows if he was right or not.

Consciousness ceases when we die so no, Hitchens does not know if he was right or not but this shadenfreudy meme is still all over the RW blogs, atm.

If there actually is a heaven Hitchens actually stands a much better chance of getting in than most so-called Christians in the Republican party.

So there's that.

Be Well.

He's dead you stupid idiot.
Of course he still knows more than you do.
#93 | POSTED BY ZATOICHI

The Zatoichi doll. Wind him up and every outburst begins with "stupid idiot."

If there actually is a heaven Hitchens actually stands a much better chance of getting in than most so-called Christians in the Republican party.

Perhaps God will grant him the ultimate respect of his beliefs and choices and grant him the nothingnness he so firmly believed awaited him.

Of course, I will make no judgments on the dead (be they sinner or saint) on where they go. I know my hope--that all are saved--and that is what I hold for Hitchens personally.

#82 | Posted by blusky

Sorry to have insulted your delicate sensibilities.

Did you say a prayer for him?

Grendel--that was my prayer for him.

91--Except you missed my point: you do not exhibit equal disdain. You pretend to be equally disdainful when in fact you hold liberalism in extreme disdain and you are a secret fan of conservatism. But then, you know that.
+++++

" he's been forgiven by a giving God"

That's assuming God is giving. Depending on which denomination you follow, you might have a different opinion on this. Did he accept Jesus Christ into his heart as his personal lord and savior? Nope. Burn in Hell. Did he receive appropriate sacraments? Nope. Burn in Hell (or maybe spend time in Limbo...). You get the point. And anyway, there's no way for him to know if he was right; if he was right, there is no afterlife.
+++++

98--I'm glad you hoped it rather than asserting it. I, for one, don't buy it.

If there actually is a heaven Hitchens actually stands a much better chance of getting in than most so-called Christians in the Republican party.
So there's that.
Be Well.

#96 | POSTED BY DETHSPUD AT 2011-12-17 01:53 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Yes those so-called Christians are so judgmental aren't they St Peter?

SO TODAY he knows if he was right or not.

If Chris Hitchens came back from the dead and said he saw G-d, would he be accused of selling out by Atheists?

If there actually is a heaven Hitchens actually stands a much better chance of getting in than most so-called Christians in the Republican party.

one wonders why the folks that profess that there is no such thing as "life after death" or heaven or hell would not come back and tell us if they were wrong.

Many have claimed that they would but none ever have.

Yes those so-called Christians are so judgmental aren't they St Peter?

Aint they, though?

I've decided my cause is not going to be happy meals, he said during a stop at the Family Table Restaurant here, apparently a dig at Mrs. Obama.

We are going to be the message-givers, said Mr. Bachmann, who runs a Christian counseling service that has been accused of trying to heal gays by persuading them to become heterosexual.

We are going to get this message across, he said. Marriage is between one man and one woman. We are going to promote families.

That being said I still disagree with Craig on his points and feel I could of done a better job of debating him on them.

#89 | Posted by Alaskan_Guy at 2011-12-17 09:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

Watch the debate between Peter Millican and William Lane Craig (This was just this October in England (while Craig was at Oxford and Richard Dawkins was unwilling to debate him causing him to be chastised heavily by is fellow atheists).

This is a great example of how the debate between a theist and a non theist should be conducted. It was conducted by both parties with great intellectual acumen and a fantastic amount of mutual respect.

This a debate that will allow you to get deeper into Craig's points (for better or worse depending on your mindset) as Millican interacts much more with Craig and thus Craig goes deeper into the reasoning behind the points he makes. In most of his debates he does not have to get too deep. This is a wonderful debate if you like debates, no matter what side you take on the issue. Both men did phenomenally and deserve their due respect.

I wish I could have been there to experience it in person (however being able to examine it outside the event does allow much more objectivity as you are not the least caught up in the atmosphere and gravity of the event).

It is nice to have a normative, seemingly friendly (I don't want to assume it is a friendly exchange and cause offense, conversation with you.

A lot of people think they would fair pretty well with Craig in comparison to those that debate him, however the atheist website disagrees (not necessarily for the fact that he is right, but just that he is better versed). It is an interesting perspective from their point of view. You might enjoy it.

Hopefully we will be spared his autobiography.

#22 | Posted by Zatoichi