Acclaimed writer and political scholar Christopher Hitchens may just be the only writer to have recently visited Iran, Iraq and North Korea. Hitchens - known for his keen wit, sharp political insight and often controversial opinions - examines the differences between the countries once linked as the "axis of evil," while revealing intriguing connections between the nations.
Christopher Hitchens is an author and journalist whose books, essays, and journalistic career span more than four decades. He has been a columnist and literary critic at The Atlantic, Vanity Fair, Slate, World Affairs, The Nation, Free Inquiry, and became a media fellow at the Hoover Institution in 2008.
Steven Boyd Saum
Steven came to the SCU team in April 2006 from The Commonwealth Club of California, where he edited The Commonwealth magazine and the collection Each a Mighty Voice. He has served in the Peace Corps and directed the Fulbright program in Ukraine, and his writing has appeared in Salon, the Christian Science Monitor, the Kenyon Review, and elsewhere.
Journalist Christopher Hitchens comments on the consequences of the age demographic in Iran. Hitchens claims that nearly half of the Iranian population is under 25, which has resulted in a "baby-boomerang."
"The Mullahs have by accident ... brought about a generation that doesn't like them."
Journalist Christopher Hitchens elaborates on his view of Iranian nuclear policy. Hitchens says, "Which do you think is worse: The Mullahs get a bomb after the way they have behaved to their own people and to their neighboring countries? Or, that they be told that they cannot have a bomb?"
Systematic use of violence to create a general climate of fear in a population and thereby to bring about a particular political objective. It has been used throughout history by political organizations of both the left and the right, by nationalist and ethnic groups, and by revolutionaries. Although usually thought of as a means of destabilizing or overthrowing existing political institutions, terror also has been employed by governments against their own people to suppress dissent; examples include the reigns of certain Roman emperors, the French Revolution (seeReign of Terror), Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union under Stalin, and Argentina during the dirty war of the 1970s. Terrorism's impact has been magnified by the deadliness and technological sophistication of modern-day weapons and the capability of the media to disseminate news of such attacks instantaneously throughout the world. The deadliest terrorist attack ever occurred in the United States on Sept. 11, 2001 (seeSeptember 11 attacks), when members of al-Qaeda terrorist network hijacked four commercial airplanes and crashed two of them into the twin towers of the World Trade Center complex in New York City and one into the Pentagon building near Washington, D.C.; the fourth plane crashed near Pittsburgh, Pa. The crashes resulted in the collapse of much of the World Trade Center complex, the destruction of part of the southwest side of the Pentagon, and the deaths of some 3,000 people.
What Hitchens is, is someone who makes it difficult for a theist to hide behind the crap they believe...and they dont like it. They listen to his reasoning and logic and KNOW he makes sense. But the theist panics at this, they cannot allow themselves to doubt, thus they perform whatever mental contortions are required in order to maintain their belief system. They kid themselves and resort to any length to indoctrinate the young. Hitchens puts it how it is and the religious dont enjoy it one little bit. Afterall, how does the theist reconcile the knowledge that they and millions before them have killed, tortured, enslaved and tormented millions more for what turned out to be a stone-age myth? However you see Hitchens, much rather i be judged by him than any religionist of any colour who can and does commit the most heinous acts for his\her god. GOD B.LESS
Hitchens puts me to sleep with his sophomoric and obvious ruminations. He sells books, so I guess it is working for him. He is a hateful individual who would smuggly tell a mother that her child is ugly. That her face is unsemetrical and her skewed eyes indicate that she is mentally deficient. All societies endure
these pompous individuals -- I'm glad I have a forum to spew some of it back.
They were taken with permission.....was texas, cali? However, Hitchens is great to listen to...even if he advocates some odd causes, such as the re-unification of Ireland. Nth Ireland has been British by peoples consent longer than America has been controlled by the white man. If an American gives merit to any Irishman that tells the 'British to leave', then i trust the same american, will give the same merit to any indigenous American call for the "white man" to leave......or is that different? The entire Irish Island was given the choice to become a Republic or remain British. What is known as the Republic voted and took Independence, Ulster voted to remain British....yet here we have Hitchens calling for forced reunification. The murdering cowards that have blown innocent families to bits in shopping malls and pubs in Ulster and on the British mainland for 30 years will love to hear that...from one who cant condemn enough the same cowardly acts performed by Islamists. Still, i'll work out his agenda on this stance eventually....cos he does have one. ;o)
Firstly, i need only know you give credit to a book, supposedly enspired by an all loving, just God, that compels its believers to obey what, in any other discourse, would be condemned,.....this gives my right to respond legitimacy. Thats without giving detail to the slaughter of innocents this God had a particular bent for, or demanded done in his name. I can say this because i have indeed read this book, and ernestly for some years. It is a continuing mystery to me that intelligent people can read this book and still manage to rationalize and endow its horrors some moral value. However, aquaintances much smarter than i do believe this, but they are more and more a minority.
Neither Hitchens or anyone else need have a degree in any given subject to make an argument. Proof that his view is erroneous is required before he can be legitimately attacked....else you be assailed for the lack of academic knowledge in historical matters if you ever mention Hitler was an Austrian. This 'uneducated' Hitchens, is regarded as one of the top 10 intellectuals on earth...thats not me saying so, thats the intelligentsia....that you could level that accusation at him only indicts you. The world's religions, by virtue of their idiocy, attract pot-shots.....ask and i'm happy to give a list of the unbelievably childish laws, notions, doctrines etc the religious heirarchy would have (almost always compel) the meek minded believe. How can they issue such crap then claim to be a victim when derided?
Neither did i suggest religion causes all harm in this world but it does give those who believe it justification. (9\11 is merely 1 example) Convince a man of an absurdity, and he will commit an attrocity in its name. Is it mere coincidence that all involved in flying airliners into those buildings were believers...that 72 virgins and eternal paradise as martyrs awaited them? I have no doubt those and any other suicide bombers whether in Iraq or elsewhere would be harder to find if these religious inducements were withdrawn. Further, had it not been for the Enlightenment Period, driven by secularists and Science, the West would be as backwardly religious too. The Religous fraternity had to be forced, kicking and screaming, to relinguish bronze-age ideology, which you as much as i should be greatful. There is of course no evidencial proof for the existence or non-existence of God...but then neither is there for the Flying Spaghetti Monster that loves us all. If it were insisted that all children be inculcated by this doctrine from the moment of babtism, thru school, they would be similarly ham-strung in their thinking...and apparently like you, unable to see how a profane, inhumane and foolish ideology perverts.The bottom line....Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennet and Harris have all said they dont wish to prevent people believing whatever fairy-tale that suits them. They state that no child should be indoctrinated before they have the maturity to know how to think and discern information......that religionists fight against this is an indictment on their belief, proving they dont have the confidence in their God to survive without the freedom to indoctrinate the young. No atheist can teach a theist anything about hypocritical ignorance.
My determination to remain ignorant? Well, considering you do not know me from Adam, your accusations are as comical as the failed comedian, Hitchens. The ongoing problem I have with his "opinions," as with your own, is that he, like I am willing to bet yourself, have never actually "studied" religion. For someone so willing to claim the justice and certitude of science, he has no scholarly background from within this particular field of study, which not only makes him out to be an ignorant hypocrite, but provides me absolutely no reason to accept any validity for his overarching argument. Yet, not surprisingly, he is more than willing to take pride in taking pot-shots at all of the world's religious traditions by selling his biased and uneducated opinions, which I can not help but to see as being any different from Johann Tetzel.
In no way am I willing to deny that there have been many horrific things which have come from religion, but to suggest that "all" of religion is evidence of just how horrible humanity is, is both woefully ignorant and ultimately foolish. The definition of religion is not purely dependent upon what horrors can be assessed from its history. There are plenty of examples throughout history of the positive and good that has, as well as can, come from religion, and to deny these facts would be like denying the many positive things attributable to the combustible engine. But instead, what he, and as it would appear to be the case, yourself, are simply more than willing to deny these facts and only focus on one aspect of what encompasses "Religion."
Ultimately, the point Hitchens tries to get across ends up being no different from any fundamental/hard-line perspective given by any number of religious traditions to be found throughout history; that is, a position of intolerance for others beliefs, particularly when taking into consideration that he has no more proof of God's existence, or however he, or you, or anyone for that matter chooses to define Its existence, or lack thereof, than anyone else. I am more than willing to allow him to believe whatever he wants, but if he or anyone else thinks they can get away with suggesting that anyone who chooses to believe in whatever religious tradition or belief they wish to believe in is in some way 'ignorant sheep' because it happens to be different from their own belief, I for one will be more than willing to shove that ignorance and hypocritical mirror right back into their face.
What part of the evil book do you find difficult to understand? It is littered with inhumane and immoral values that would make any devils' toes curl. It is your determination to remain ignorant in the face of all evidence that you are ignorant that makes it necessary to rid the world of the religious mind. Immorality is not confined to the religious, but its the best vehicle mankind has devised to justify it. That it takes science and secular thinking to force the theist (thru shame and embarrassment of defending the indefensible) to discard the immoral teaching of this evil man-made entity, is the legacy you leave for future generations' astonishment.....provided of course we survive the theists tendency for the messianic death-wish. The ability to indoctrinate the childs mind before they are old enough to discern for themselves is the only weapon you have left. This evil will be killed by a whiff of science and a dose of common sense.
Christopher Hitchens the Hack!
Christopher Hitchens the Hypocrite!
Why doesn't he take the time to actually "study" religion instead of selling his biased and very own intolerant beliefs? His viewpoints on religion are so pathetically ignorant it's no wonder he has to act like a clown in certain situations in an effort to attempt to get his failed points across. Anyone with an ounce of knowledge in Religious Studies knows that there are bad things to be found throughout all the world's religious traditions, but to essentially suggest that "all" of religion is nothing but one example after another of why the world is in the dire straits it is, is akin to suggesting he reeks of feces 24/7, which by the way, when he makes the ridiculous claims he does, I can not help but to think to be true.
How about giving this a try you failed comedian?