Does Hitchens usually write articles this shitty?

[brawndolicious]

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/06/hitchens200706?printable=true&currentPage=all

I'm sure if you investigated feelings on race and religion for poor minorities in any country the results wouldn't be very favorable.

Take American media (where they blame young black men for...anything) but there's a feeling of safe-ness because gentrification is a very large issue. Is that problem in Britain? probably, but those damn ragheads flew a plane into a building and so the news is obsessed with them. Doesn't take a genius (and you have an ex-muslim here!) to figure out that religion says how to have a good society, not how to punish people for not being like you. I don't know how the coverage was in Britain, but the day of 9/11 a news anchor actually asked a specialist or politician "will people be talking about this for a couple weeks or for years" which made me think that because of the religious motivation given that it's going to make people want a "similar" reaction (blind raghead fuckathon). I knew that the day of 9/11. BECAUSE OF HOW THE NEWS REPORTED IT.

[Flannel Boy]

Really, should you be calling anyone out on the quality of their writing? Even though Hitch was probably tanked while he wrote the damn piece I can at least understand him.

[Boogie]

Really, should you be calling anyone out on the quality of their writing?

what he said.

[Phoenix Dark]

America media blamed young black men for anything? Maybe they wouldn't if young black men weren't committing almost all the crime

[Human Snorenado]

America media blamed young black men for anything? Maybe they wouldn't if young black men weren't committing almost all the crime

YOU TELL THOSE DARKIES, WHITE DEVIL!

[Mandark]

Say what you will about Hitchens, but you can't argue with the prose style.

[brawndolicious]

I honestly don't understand what his expertise is.  I mean normally when I read somebody trying to hype people up, they're in a special field like a preacher, politician, etc but he talks about many different things and at least now, makes no sense.  I understand him being an idiot, but who the fuck is his connection, the Jack Off party?

[Fresh Prince]

Social commentary is probably one of the worst aspects of society today. Basically most people have become mouthpieces for other people's rhetoric while doing nothing physically to achieve what they 'believe' in.

[Boogie]

I honestly don't understand what his expertise is. 

His expertise is in snappy writing.  And that's about it.

[brawndolicious]

No it takes a special kind of fucked up to not take your "snappy writing" and write for a tabloid but a political magazine instead.

[Boogie]

No it takes a special kind of fucked up to not take your "snappy writing" and write for a tabloid but a political magazine instead.

what

stop affirming Malek's assessment of you, nintenho.

[Fresh Prince]

No it takes a special kind of fucked up to not take your "snappy writing" and write for a tabloid but a political magazine instead.

I don't know what you mean.

[Boogie]

No it takes a special kind of fucked up to not take your "snappy writing" and write for a tabloid but a political magazine instead.

I don't know what you mean.

No one really does.

[brawndolicious]

he tries to hide how well a writer can make a person look civilized and say the popular opinion of fearful white people.

basically he's a little jerk-off alcoholic.

[Fresh Prince]

No one really does.

he tries to hide how well a writer can make a person look civilized and say the popular opinion of fearful white people.

basically he's a little jerk-off alcoholic.

Duh? The difference between him and most other 'fearful white people' is that people actually pay to read his opinions.

Personally I'd take his career over most anyday.

[brawndolicious]

I'm asking what is his audience and how do they react to something with this much stupidity?

[Fresh Prince]

I'm asking what is his audience and how do they react to something with this much stupidity?

Anti-theists, libertarians, imperialists, right wing hawks and bemused people.

[APF]

Who the fuck is Maureen Dowd???

[Cheebs]

Who the fuck is Maureen Dowd???

[Flannel Boy]

[Van Cruncheon]

No it takes a special kind of fucked up to not take your "snappy writing" and write for a tabloid but a political magazine instead.

I don't know what you mean.

No one really does.

am nintenho has a strange grammar all his own. subjects and objects are constantly at war, and strange litotic sequences oddly diffuse whatever opinion he might be trying to convey.

[brawndolicious]

you don't need to read my opinion, you can just read his article and see how shitty of a writer he is.

[Van Cruncheon]

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/06/hitchensqanda200706

i really ain't seeing your complaints. i agree with hitchens' view that multiculturalism requires something from all participating groups, not just kowtowing by the dominant ethnicity, and it should never tolerate extremism. he even acknowledges that secular members of these minority groups are getting locked out of the government support loop because the government only reacts to extremists. on top of that, hitchens excoriates all religions -- islamic, christian, hindi, etc -- because all their texts can be interpreted to endorse violence, and he correctly notes that terrorism is hardly exclusive to islam, although most terrorists these days are islamic.

the fact that the church of england supported the fatwa on salman rushdie is utterly fucking grotesque.

[Flannel Boy]

Yeah, I read the article last night, along with the Q and A Hitchens did, and don't know what am nintenho was going on about. I would also love to be able to write as "shitty" as Hitchens.

[Van Cruncheon]

do we ever really know what am nintenho is going on about?

if he responds, i hope that he makes an attempt to actually articulate his point...whatever it is.

[Boogie]

do we ever really know what am nintenho is going on about?

if he responds, i hope that he makes an attempt to actually articulate his point...whatever it is.

I'm not sure I want to understand how his mind works.

[brawndolicious]

I don't see the reason for this article beyond getting a paycheck from Vanity Fair.  In the same way that New York is used as a breeding ground for fear it uses Londonistan as a breeding ground for terrorists.  It's not who makes the fucked up interpretations that matters, it's who's the fucked up psycho that needs religion to explain murderous motives.  He decided to sit and type that on my own island, I just saw something different.  And that difference can be associated with murderers.

THAT'S NOT FUCKING JOURNALISM.

The entire article goes on and on about how the reasons for why they did a terrorist act or why muslims act isolated is changed because it's proven that they're better off in this country or didn't have a reason to have a problem with this country.  NO SHIT THEY'RE FUCKING PSYCHOS.

[Van Cruncheon]

...

i cannot parse that. can you please make your point with proper grammar? you seem to agree with hitchens -- that london is full of islamic extremists -- and then say he sucks?

[brawndolicious]

Well why would he write an article about something that involves no compromise (not that I think that they're should be)?  Does he think it deserves media attention?

[Van Cruncheon]

because there's loads of folks out there, especially in america, who don't know anything about london's muslim situation and the british government's laissez-faire appeasement policies for dealing with them? there was a lot i was unaware of in that article.

[Flannel Boy]

Like Drinky said, this article was written for an American audience--an audience that is likely unfamiliar with the present state of the Islamic community in London.

[brawndolicious]

I saw lots of stuff on ABC and whatever the fuck right after 9/11 talking about how muslims in europe like to live in seperate areas and are much more radical normally.

[Van Cruncheon]

plus hitchens is an entertaining writer, despite some of his batshit neocon screed back in the early post-9/11 days. good writers can revisit topics with their own twist and i'll certainly read it -- he provided a lot of context and insight i hadn't read before.

i'm not seeing what flipped you out there, duder.

[brawndolicious]

so he's a hypocrite and is basically writing what most british people want to read.

[Van Cruncheon]

how is he a hypocrite?

[Fresh Prince]

This is one confusing thread.

[brawndolicious]

he goes from acting like a neocon to bashing falwell on fox news.

[Flannel Boy]

he goes from acting like a neocon to bashing falwell on fox news.

Just because he supports Bush's foreign policy that does not mean he's a neo-conservative. He's a leftist and an atheist (anti-theist according to him) who disagrees with Falwell on just about everything. So of course he's going to attack him.

Meanwhile Hitchen brother is a Catholic conservative who disagrees with the Iraq war.

[Human Snorenado]

I honestly don't understand what his expertise is.

His expertise is in snappy writing.  And that's about it.

You take that shit back.  That man is also an incredible alcoholic.

[brawndolicious]

what do you mean by "bush's foreign policy"?

[Flannel Boy]

what do you mean by "bush's foreign policy"?

Obviously, Bush's policy with Norway.

[Van Cruncheon]

wtf, nintenho? you are a tard. neocon's have absolutely no religious affiliation -- and are often at odds with religious conservatives under the Republican party umbrella. at best, they share a similar goal: the preservation of Israel and a fundamental desire to represent US interests in the Middle East in a more martial fashion.

very, very few -- if any -- of the PNAC neocon set have legitimate fundamentalist Christian sympathies.

[Van Cruncheon]

i can't believe i'm defending christopher hitchens. :'(

[Human Snorenado]

wtf? you are a tard. neocon's have absolutely no religious affiliation -- and are often at odds with religious conservatives under the Republican party umbrella. at best, they share a similar goal -- the preservation of Israel and a fundamental desire to represent US interests in the Middle East in a more martial fashion.

very, very few -- if any -- of the PNAC neocon set have legitimate fundamentalist Christian sympathies.

Yeah, quite a few of them are Jews actually.

Goddammit nintenho is stupid.  It's a shame Federwang is too busy to run this board- this thread should be the tipping point that sends ol' nintenho down the slope into Townie Leperdom.

[brawndolicious]

I only saw him once on fox discrediting hannity and colmes and hating "everything" about a guy that had very strong support for bush.

if he's this stupid why didn't you just tell me?

[Flannel Boy]

Right Drinky, neocons come from many religious affiliations. However I don't think that Hitchens is a neoconservative. For instance he has criticized Israel on many occasions. Outside of his stance on the Iraq war, I really don't know what makes him such a neocon.

I only saw him once on fox discrediting hannity and colmes and hating "everything" about a guy that had very strong support for bush.

if he's this stupid why didn't you just tell me?

So your logic is that since Hitchens supports Bush's war, he should also support every moron who has ever supported Bush?

[brawndolicious]

when you say that a person supports bush's foreign policy, that's a VERY bad thing to most people.

[Van Cruncheon]

malek, i don't really think hitchens is a neocon, either -- he's more of a traditional old world british conservative with a warmongering bent. he's pretty hard to classify -- he's hawkish and isolationist, but anti-religious and somewhat politically intolerant.

[Van Cruncheon]

nintenho, many people of different political stripes support bush's war for vastly different reasons. hitchens doesn't support the war because he wants to exterminate islam and raise the flag of christian triumphalism, nor is he in the game for foreign investment interests; he supports it because he believes that the extremist islamic fringe has begun to seed effectively in his home country (and the first world in general) and he thinks it needs to be checked at the source.

[Flannel Boy]

HAHA

[Van Cruncheon]

that is a man who appreciates vice!

[Flannel Boy]

when you say that a person supports bush's foreign policy, that's a VERY bad thing to most people.

Hitchens was not attacking Falwell because he supported Bush’s policies, but for his stupid fundamentalist beliefs, his intolerance, his stupid university, etc.

that is a man who appreciates vice!

If only he appreciated the sweat protection of Right Guard.

[Van Cruncheon]

oh, you'd hit it. seriously: would you let hitchens pitch or would you have him catch?

[Flannel Boy]

oh, you'd hit it. seriously: would you let hitchens pitch or would you have him catch?

I don't think he knows how to play baseball.

[Van Cruncheon]

george f will does, and how!

[APF]

I don't see the reason for this article beyond getting a paycheck from Vanity Fair.

That's what I'm saying re: Maureen Dowd and her NYT column.  Who the fuck uses terms like, "quid profiterole??"

[APF]

Oh, and considering "Neocon" is code for "Jewish intellectual," lol at the Falwell comments.

[Flannel Boy]

Oh, and considering "Neocon" is code for "Jewish intellectual," lol at the Falwell comments.

Most Jews, and certainly most Jewish intellectuals, are liberal. Unless you meant "Neocon" is code for "slightly conservative Jewish intellectual".

[APF]

Oh, and considering "Neocon" is code for "Jewish intellectual," lol at the Falwell comments.

Most Jews, and certainly most Jewish intellectuals, are liberal. Unless you meant "Neocon" is code for "slightly conservative Jewish intellectual".

Really it depends on what you mean by conservative.

[Flannel Boy]

That depends on what you mean by depends.