Christopher Hitchens debates Mark Danner (1)

[greeneyesmax]

0:17 "Christopher Hichens"

[slydog1ca]

In Christopher We Trust

[bushiyo2]

Fuck you five minute intro....

[darkstar8043]

Why are the introductions to these debates always so long winded

[writersblock26]

@darkstar8043 So that by the time the debate actually begins, you're waiting with bated breath (no pun intended). Still, I'm not sure that is necessary for a luminary like Christopher Hitchens.

[RPenta]

Well looking back now, we can say with full confidence: Hitchens despite his British accent, arrogance, and warmongering was f**king wrong then and now about Iraq.

And he has the balls to talk about the violence religion has let loose upon the world?

[UnOxonien]

@RPenta Rofl! "British accent and arrogance." No wonder no one thinks you're worth listening to.

[TempusFugit101]

Bush did not make us safer for the simple fact he refused to secure the borders.

If you left the doors and windows of your home unlocked, could you say you are keeping your family safe?

[redshark618]

Has Bush Made us Safer?

Short answer...? N-

[Nerd042]

The debate starts at 7:50

[Assaultpredator]

Everyone is agnostic.

You can be an atheist leaning agnostic or theist leaning one, but either extreme claiming knowledge that somehow others are unaware of is ignorant for both.

Many atheists have that "air of superiority" because they feel they know something many others are blind to.

Everyone is agnostic.

[jedfa987]

@Assaultpredator

Only if you require such ridiculous levels or proof that you make intelligent thought impossible.

For example, you could be an artificial intelligence posting to youtube after travelling back in time from the future, or your post could be a figment of my imagination. But no one thinks I'm claiming knowledge when I assume you are a human being and reply to you as such.

Yes God could exist, but the likelihood of a god who matters at all existing is equally unlikely.

[MichaelnChristine]

@Assaultpredator Not really...

[moh490234890238490]

@Assaultpredator atheist don't claim to have knowledge we just don't believe because there's no reason to.

[Clifton100]

sometimes I wonder if Hitchens is speaking english cuz I am too stupid or not well educated enough to understand his deep knowledge and creative wordsmith skills.

[Galactu5]

@Clifton100

Then it's your duty to work on that. You've got time and I hope you take that upon yourself.

[Clifton100]

@Galactu5 your life must suck shit if you're 48 and playing on youtube this much.

[Galactu5]

@Clifton100

I said something decent and constructive. A simple suggestion, and you insult me?

Youtube is one of the better websites on the net, why shouldn't I spend time here watching various educational videos? When you mature, .... oh never mind. ;)

[amandafromcanada]

Hitchens expresses it succintly. I always thought religion was a crock of shit!

[christianapologetic1]

@amandafromcanada youre thick... get some education hunny

[l337pwnage]

Hitchens @ 7:50

[CarmineFragione]

God is the wise professor, with his monocle, who walks behinds his students to see what they are thinking and writing. When a student says they speak by faith of their subjective rationalizations, because they have senses, God sees and pats the student on the back to say, "Well said my son, you can speak by faith what you will freely, as I gave you the right, but when it comes to the Objective Truth, I alone am God." Also, my daughter, 'have spoken well of LIberty, which no fact shall deprieve

[Ninja7ime]

nice pseudo profundity

[loonpolice1]

Has Bush made us safer?

Or did Bush kick a ME wasp's nest.

I think he pissed off the wasps.

They'll calm down after a couple hundred years if we're still around.

[anikinippon]

I never saw this debate and I've seen many Hitchens debates. Thank you so much for the posting!

[CarmineFragione]

Equally so, LIes and Truths are built on evidence. It is only the opposition who says the other side has no evidence. Truth is not the facts, but how one desires the facts to construct the reality. Thus one man's lie is another's truth. It is about if you wish to spend eternity in Hell

or Heaven. And so they said " We rather rule in Hell than serve in Heaven. The

facts are not proof in themselves. They must be digested and seen to agree with the palate of the consumer. What is Truth?

[Sirstingray]

jkqd14 can be summed in his analysis by the Hitchens quote: "that which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence"

[jkqd14]

Well said. I think that while that quote is way too broad -- it eliminates math! -- it definitely applies when people make claims about the physical existence of something.

[FreeInquisition]

Why isn't this in a playlist!!

[CarmineFragione]

Evolution implies that creatures fitted and refitted to environmental pressures to cause change over time, according to the rules of chemistry. But the arisal of abstract thinking in humans reveals a totally different event horizon. The world

does not neccessarily exist for chemistry or earth sciences. Evolution is unable to

address the questions of transcendance,when the natural is disregarded. Evolution is the half blind, naked sister to the other humanities. Above nature, God is God.

[moiphx2]

I don't like either the Iraq war or Bush and his administration, but I think the most idiotic thing anyone can do is call Bush stupid.

[jkqd14]

Agreed.

[irishgeal1]

never has so much garbage been uttered by so many by mere way of interduction. kinder garden could put forward a far better outset of rules than the badly disguissed leanings of them 2 pricks

[Asparagusville]

Knowledgeable "atheists" are as common as unicorns & Pegasuses. Once ammunition becomes prohibitively expensive, incidents of pistol-whipping will sharply increase. [Embrace confusion, or cold fusion, as it is your lover. To our homosexual brethren: Renounce your atheistic Faith. Forsake the group-dynamic & step into the light. Nuances & subtleties between Christian denominations are as important as regional dialects. Man is an explorer. He follows many paths.]

[cupocity303]

Atheism is not a faith dipshit. Rather it is the lack of faith.

[Asparagusville]

Sister, is that what you eat? Try something from

the other end of the alimentary canal.

[tubeficator]

@cupocity303

Allow me to rectify as it is not entirely accurate. Theism is the position that there is a God, Atheism is the position that there is not God. Faith is a entirely different matter as it has several uses. I can be said to be a belief since you claim that there is no God without having any chance of proving it.

I would call my self an atheist if it can be seen as the opposite of a religious person.

[tubeficator]

@tubeficator

Moreover I would say on a personal note. I do not know whether there is a God or not. I have no reason at all to think there is/was one. BUT most importantly I do not give a shit. I think this has become a frekin charade with all this debates, however interesting and entertaining they can get, it is pathetic that it is even an issue. We do not know if there is a God or not but if he wanted us to know he ... HE WOULD HAVE TOLD US! .... and the message would be uniform.

[mooogles]

@cupocity303 Actually, atheism is the presence of faith in mankind.

that may be a larger leap than faith in divine providence.

[cupocity303]

@mooogles Ha, even better. Works for me, I may quote that one.

[F33bs]

@mooogles Possibly one of the dumbest comments about atheism I've ever read.

[mooogles]

@F33bs Hmmm its been a while since i posted this. However I think I know what went through my mind and don't believe its stupid it all.

Why don't you think about it a bit first. If you still don't understand, i'll gladly tell you my train of thought. Maybe we can have a civilized discourse then.

Until then, don't start a conversation with such negativity. I expect much more from an undergraduate.

[F33bs]

@mooogles What's to think about? You are substituting "trust" for the word "faith," and altering the definitions of both to fit your own bogus argument. It'd be Orwellian if it weren't already so transparently self-serving and pathetic.

[mooogles]

@F33bs Sigh. This is absolutely upsetting. Best wishes to you. Maybe one day you'll see that you're the most ignorant amongst all of us believers and non-believers.

Until then, try not to disgrace your brothers and sisters too much.

[F33bs]

@mooogles Ha ha. You're trying so hard to rise above the level of abject stupidity set by your own words that I don't think even the most pretentious and contrived attempts at clawing what little high ground is left will succeed in convincing anyone.

I love how you don't even address my point about your word usage, which is the reason that your statement was stupid. Instead you just go on a whimsical rant against nothing in particular, and end with something cryptic. Care to take another try?

[natmanprime]

9:57 to 10:02. hitchens has a moustache like ming the merciless!

And I think thats very funny.

[DrCruel]

If skepticism, as opposed to atheism, was what was being championed, you'd have cause to restrict secular socialists from the discussion. One could just as well argue that only movements that religiously observed the dictates of the Sermon on the Mount should be used in any criticism of Christianity.

The problem is that various socialist movements of the 20th century, in the name of science and atheism, have killed over a hundred million people. A bit hard to ignore.

[fctchk]

No one has been killed "in the name of" science a methodology (the most successful in human history) to attain knowledge and no one has been killed "in the name of" atheism disbelief in god. The knee jerk trotting out of these shopworn canards must be exposed at every turn for what it is nonsense.

[fctchk]

Corrected punctuation

No one has been killed "in the name of" science - a methodology (the most successful in human history) to attain knowledge and no one has been killed "in the name of" atheism - disbelief in god. The knee jerk trotting out of these shopworn canards must be exposed at every turn for what it is - nonsense.

[whiff1962]

Yes, but the little bit you fail to mention-and one that Hitchens has clearly articulated-is the fact that many of these Horrible dicators suggested a use of religious sentiments among the masses, as well as the politically effective co-opting of religious imagery and references.

[nixonfanatic]

I'm going to have to take issue with that statement as well.

I challenge you to find any one instance when someone has killed 'in the name of atheism'. Racial purity, sure. Xenophobia, sure. But not one leader of men has ever said 'because there is no god, you must die!!!'

The very idea is laughable.

[RestiveBob]

Well said. Funny (and pathetic) how religious people look at atheism as though it were a cult or religion, when all it is is a refusal to believe some line of crap somebody ELSE has bought into. There is not anti-Heaven, no non-Holy book and no un-Scripture. We leave the hocus-pocus to the faithful.

[andid]

I dont care if atheists, christians, muslims, or any group caused the most global atrocities...for me the point is, there is no proof for God. Why allow groups that cause global atrocities AND are provably wrong?

[Adebay0r]

Well you should care. Stalin (atheist) murdered what could have been somewhere between 10-20 million people, yet there is a profound difference between that and September 11th. September 11th was BECAUSE of religion: they felt it was their duty to Allah or some other religious bullshit. We have to worry that such extreme people are around today. George Bush has advisor's who believe that nuclear war bringing about the end of the world is what God wants?! Religion is evil, maybe not on the face.

[crazykb]

"Stalin (atheist) murdered what could have been somewhere between 10-20 million people" I hate this argument. Stalin DID NOT DO the things he did because of Atheism! "George Bush has advisor's who believe that nuclear war bringing about the end of the world is what God wants?!". Apperently yes. SOme in the white house want nuclear war because they believe that that will bring back Christ.

[ianhoppe]

Right on...

Stalin, Mussolini, and Hitler all had moustaches as well. The fact that mass murderers and tyrants have something in common does not mean it was the base for their actions.

Correlation is not causation

[crazykb]

"Correlation is not causation". It would be nice if religious people would understand that! See ya, brother...

[loungepanda]

Spot on quote, zeldagoblin.

[morgandrim]

Hi Adebay0r. By what you say, it seems to me the difference ( the "Profound" difference - as you put it ) is anywhere between 9 997000 persons murdered and 19 997000 persons murdered !

You say Religion is Evil. I call Atheism "Religion Unleashed."

You have your opinion, I have mine !

[Adebay0r]

How can you call Atheism "Religion Unleashed" - Atheism is the very opposite of Religion. All Atheism is is just freeing your mind from the shackles of Religion and thinking freely using what evidence we have. Humans have been on this earth for a maximum of 250,000 years - why is it that only in these last 6odd thousand years has God presented itself to the people?

[CyrusGuitar]

Your opinion just happens to be bullshit morgandim. I would love to see this society that murdered so many people in the name of atheism, and I hope you will not mention the dogmatically worshipful soviet communists, one of the least skeptical societies in history.

[morgandrim]

Oh yes, I forgot, CyrusGuitar. Atheists can do no wrong ! Forgive me for stepping on your Sacred Ground !

[nixonfanatic]

Blech, his point is valid.

People do not kill because they are atheists, while they might in the name of god.

Find me one leader of men who said 'because there is no god (or I don't believe in one) you must die.'

Hasn't happened. Find me someone who said 'god told me to kill you'. Fairly frequent in historical terms.

[user8980]

How about 3. Pol Pot, Stalin and Mao

[stinky472]

Most atheists repudiate *indoctrination*. Religion is but one form of indoctrination (though one of the most obvious and widespread forms today). Those three dictators did best with people who were susceptible to indoctrination, much like the sheep who still believe in God today.

[nixonfanatic]

A very reasonable trio to point out. Let me make the usual point in response. The 'mindset' of atheism is not like the 'mindset' of religion. If one is an atheist, one acts on one's own behalf, not on that of a divine entity.

The rationale goes like this: without god, evil people would do evil - and good people would do good.

Those three were perpetrating evil, but not because 'atheism' told them to, whereas god tells people to do evil all the time. It's a matter of justification.

nix

[janjanjan0]

without god, evil people would do evil - and good people would do good. Yeah, and if you want good people to do evil things- than it takes religion.

[justinbernal1]

@janjanjan0 and also if you want evil people to do good things that too takes religion. having spent some time in jail i found many people finaly see the eveil ways of there sins through religion. as for the athiest in jail, who had no intention of doing the next right thing, what power will bring them to do good. there own belief in the self?

[R2rGangstaFC]

@nixonfanatic fuck nixon. but you are right. but fuck you for some other shit nigga

[RestiveBob]

Nice to see Bill O'Reilly is your mentor. Now which of those three in on record for mass murder BECAUSE they didn't believe in God? You might as well accuse them of being left-handed or having wavy hair.

[slantythecamel]

Or my favorite.. stalin and hitler had mustaches, does that mean everyone who has a mustache is a murderous dictator.

[RestiveBob]

Precisely!

[burnhippiesforfuel]

i'm pretty sure in hitler's case it was vegetarianism.

[RestiveBob]

I'm an atheist and I wouldn't dream of hurting anyone who didn't threaten me. I don't see how my atheism has anything to do with my regard for other people. Another atheist could well be a serial killer. But is their atheism responsible? If Allah says Jews are evil, a Muslim is promoted to hate and persecute Jews. With no god, there are no god's rules to follow. Your three evil atheists could well have been just brought up badly. Or do you think they were?

[cupocity303]

Excellent poing RestiveBob, very well put.

Simple-minded religious people always bring up Stalin and Hitler in defense of religion and the evil do'ers who did something evil in the name of religion.

What you said should be the automatic talking-poin in response to them.

[Asparagusville]

What's "talking-poin"? You're not

simple-minded are you? Ask your

parole officer to enroll you in a

literacy course.

[cupocity303]

Great so I missed the T in the talking-poinT. How pathetic do you have to be when your only ad-hominem attack is a typo missing a latter in a word.

Have some balls and address what i've said head on unstead of clutching at straws.

[Asparagusville]

"cupo-303": Once you are set free, you'll have probation to contend with. The road back to respectability is a long one. Has your boyfriend been supportive?

[cupocity303]

The only one that has a boyfriend is you going brokeback mountain goat herding with your male companion.

[Asparagusville]

"cupo3": Are you a homosexual?"

[eXcommunicate1979]

Shouldn't your name be "Aspergerville"?

[Asparagusville]

Do you have A.I.D.S.?

[theToryAnarchist]

Atheism isn't really a belief system; it's a bit like me saying I'm a non-Muslim. "OK, and...?" I think atheists should be more clear about what they offer as alternatives besides telling us to be wowed by hubble telescope pictures and vague references to the Enlightenment or perhaps, in Hitchens' case, Lucretius and Epicurus.

[AntigoneRisen]

Atheism isn't even a system to offer anything. What is offered is exactly what everyone says - thinking for yourself, analyzing, and making decisions on fact and reason. I think any atheist is quite up front about the benefits: you no longer have to live in subservience to bronze age superstition about an all powerful space daddy or his zombie son (or other religion).

The

[theToryAnarchist]

O.K., but again so what? Where does that leave us? I can't imagine every atheist has the same feelings about morality and philosophy, so I wish that there was a greater discussion of alternatives rather than just insistence on negation. You make it seem so obvious that vague ideas of "reason" and "thinking for yourself" will make things all better. Stem cells are one thing, but what about larger questions of morality and purpose?

[jkqd14]

It doesn't have to be a belief system. If you say "I don't believe in unicorns", would it be fair for me to come back with, "Well you have to bring a positive belief system to the table or you might as well not even talk"?

And by the way, Hitchens talks about the Enlightenment much, much more than about Lucretius and Epicurus. And valuing the intellect and humanistic egalitarianism more than faith-in-spite-of-contrary-evi­dence is not a "vague reference."

[jkqd14]

The point, which you missed, was that if something is obviously false, one must not come armed with an alternative in order to point this out.

Read. Philosophy. You'll learn about logic, about why morality comes from logic, and most relevantly about how identifying a baseless assertion as such does not necessitate proposing an alternative.

It's important that people stop believing fairy tales from the Bronze Age. That must come before they can understand true, secular morality.

[theToryAnarchist]

(previous accidentally left on sibling's profile) I never said that one needs an alternative to prove something wrong, just when dealing with something so fundamental as religion and morality, it helps to have a real alternative on hand in the larger discussion. Could you inspire morality in a felon by explaining Kant? Give hope to an impoverished Calcuttan by arguing Sartre of Foucault? Does Aristotle bring you to tears?Dunno, but Hitch isn't giving too many answers here.(ps--secular morality?)

[jkqd14]

You're advocating lying to people you consider stupid. You already lose through your neoconservative classism.

Beyond that, I think one could easily sum up Kant's very simple Categorical Imperative, the basis of his moral philosophy. Sartre and Foucault have little to offer. And while I've never cried over Aristotle, the clarity of thought and purity of the human quest for truth is a sublime thing to witness, and unlike in religion, morality is based in understanding, not in fear of punishment.

[theToryAnarchist]

You have a habit of dragging unfounded assumptions into this. I never said that felons and the impoverished were stupid, merely more likely to understand the desperation of the human condition. And I doubt Christians go to church because they're afraid(why wouldn't they be afraid of Allah equally?)but because the message strikes them as true. Many of the Christians I know are Christians because they believe it to be the best way to cope with their humanity (among them redeemed felons, btw).

[jkqd14]

Then I indeed overestimated you and took you for a Nietzschean, Straussian, "The public needs God and simple morality even though we know it's bullshit" type.

And I didn't say Christians went to church out of fear, though those who didn't have the good fortune of choosing their church and were "born into it" (the overwhelming majority) are indeed forced out of fear of punishment material and spiritual to attend church. What I said was that religion teaches *morality* through fear of punishment.

[sissyfist]

foucault has little to offer? Even if Foucault had only written the panopticon part in disipline and punish, he would still be probably the one philosopher in the last 100 years to say anything meaningful about the problems of the modern society...morality, privacy, freedom from tyranny, etc.

[bleustilton]

There have been a few regimes that have attempted to create the atheist utopia, whether that's based on a Marxist ideology or another. It's involved lots of death. Just shrugging that off with semantics isn't good enough. Atheism is a pretty basic tenet of these ideologies.

[acehimself]

But Hitchens has addressed these and I think he's right, all of these regimes still tap into the religious impulse, with cults of personality and leader worship. But to argue that Stalin's opposition to Christianity was the primary reason for his crimes rather than communism and totalitarianism is rediculous. Almost every Western society today is run in a secular fashion without the influence of religious doctrine and none of them are genocidal and totalitarian.

[bleustilton]

I do like Hitchens, but blaming the crimes of Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot on religion is more than a bit of a stretch. There is definitely fanatical devotion to a cause, but to attribute every unreasoned fanatical feeling to religion is silly (no matter how clever it is). And I know that Stalin probably didn't have an overwhelming personal problem with Christianity. However, it's one of the points of The Communist Manifesto, and to get to that utopia you have to crush it.

[bleustilton]

I suppose the other thing I'd say is that religion and the state must remain completely separate for the good of both. Secularism is required for a government to function properly, just as political neutrality is for any religion.

[zeldagoblin]

This annoys me too. Its beside the point. To quote Chris Eccleston in 28 Days Later (ok, frivolous, but I think it applies...) in history we see "people killing people". Religious or not, its what people do, sadly. We need to stop this silly competition of who killed more, and get on with looking at actual evidence. It is just a distraction from what the real issue is.

[Adebay0r]

Surely in finding the root cause i.e. religion and working against it we reduce the possibility of future unnecessary deaths, so it is in fact a significant aspect of the 'real issue'.

[1n354a]

True-but the best god defense there is out there is to complicate the issue..."Sure I know there is no proof of God, but Stalin killed millions of people and Hitler ate steak on Fridays, and French women don't shave their pits! So there has to be a god...and not only a god, but my God."

[Oxygaunt]

Sigh, what a lengthy introdution.

[TomPiltoff]

Who made the stupid intro featuring Christopher 'Hichens'?

[HotLeper]

Bush has made the world safer. Much easier to lure terrorists into one place and kill them then find them in different sovreign nations and hunt them all over the map.

[niginit]

that is just dumb, thanks for trying though.

[niginit]

It's Hitchens with a T!:)

I really want everyone to think openly about what he has to say because he is extremely biased about american imperialism and completely misses the point on which religion is worse.

islam is retarded and their dirty laundry is on the world yard for everyone to see(which makes it 10x less dangerous).

on the other hand christianity in america is largely conspiratory and secret especially in government which makes it 10x more dangerous.

[thricebannedatheist]

"islam is retarded and their dirty laundry is on the world yard for everyone to see(which makes it 10x less dangerous)."

That would be the case, but for the special privileges granted to the backwards nonsense we call "religion". If Islam was a secular political movement, not a godly one, then there would be no such term as "Islamophobia". Unfortunately just cannot say a bad word about religion (without being labelled a "militant" and compared to Hitler / Stalin)

[niginit]

either way religion is dangerous and religion with power is inevitably destructive. which religion has more power?? islam or the christian nation we call usa? the reason everyone doesn't look at america as a religios fascist superpower is because most americans have the rosey glasses on and therefore think that american religion is benign. I wish it were true but the truth in fact is that america is the largest and most dangerous religios power in the world.

[thricebannedatheist]

Not true. In the Middle Ages a lot of Christians were savage sub-human monsters who make the Taliban look civilized. The death toll of the 30 years war in Germany alone was 14 mil out of a population of 18 mil. But Christians have not behaved that way for many centuries. We have to accept that in the 21st century Islam is a greater threat than any other ideology we have seen since Nazism. Far more dangerous than communism for example; at least they didn't seak martyrdom!

[niginit]

A. a great deal of nazis were actually christians infact a great deal of those christian nazis were confessing christians!

B. christians today have learned to be more candid about their religious conviction and therefore have been viewed by most as being moderate or passive but the truth is that they have just learned to appear that way.

C. dismissing the past atrocities of christians is not nearly a smart or advisable practice. sorry but the faith is just as strong if not stronger today.

[thricebannedatheist]

But America is not a nation of Nazis. European anti-Semitism is (at least before Muslims came along) exclusivly Christian; but that is totally off topic. Let me say this again: we are in the 21st century now, let's deal with PRESENT threats. And I don't know how you can accuse me of "ignoring" Christian atrocites! Just look at what I said.

[niginit]

the problem is that people like you think that we are out of the religious darkages. we are very much in the same stage of time with the same people in control. look at bush's grandfather, he was convicted of war crimes ( he was a nazi). these people are still in control and they are secretly pushing their religious faith while seeming (atleast to people like you) as moderates or rational. theres a reason why genocide still goes on, they are still the force of evil in the world.

[thricebannedatheist]

If you believe the world leader of scientific and egineering research in human history, also, I might add, the first true secular nation is in the Dark Ages then there is no point in trying to discuss anything with you.

[niginit]

You shouldn't try to argue with me, discussion is always helpful but you have no argument because you hold no facts in your pea-sized brain.

[dubzy81]

10x more dangerous? you are out of your fucking tree. you IDIOT! 300 murders a day in Baghdad alone.

[niginit]

do i need to list the false wars that america(directly influenced by religion in the administration) has waged over the past decade that has left MILLIONS dead and even more homeless and diseased?

you need a history lesson ya fuckin dunce.

300 murders a day? no you are out of your bush you little fuckin mongrel.

[soapfiction]

False wars? What the hell is a 'false' war? If you mean 'false' as in, "They never fucking happened", then you're probably right.

Really, just what wars have we fought since 9/11 that have claimed MILLIONS of lives? Where the hell did you get that number? You either pulled it out of your ass, or got it from the bullshit Lancet study, which, through basic math, is easily proved false. Oh, and religion was not the cause for the US. America is the secular side, and the jihadists are religious.

[hackenbollox]

I think he means 'false flag'. I hope that's helpful.

[xlioilx]

soapfiction - you would like to believe its secular just ask Sara Palin or any other right wing if its not a religious war.

They kicked out a few atheists and Muslims that tried to fight on our side, so whats that tell you. in fact the jihadists call the US forces the crusaders. Its a religious war for oil

[soapfiction]

You can keep making up all the bullshit you want, it won't make your arguments true. No atheists or muslims have been kicked out of the US military for being so.If your argument was true, you'd have some evidence .I know of plenty secular soldiers in the military, and our true allies in Iraq are secular as well. Look at the Iraqi leftist groups that supported the regime change, such as the Iraqi Communist Party, largely ignored by the American Left. Oh, and fuck what the jihadists say. Go Hitch.

[xlioilx]

soapfiction

watch?v=YBmnoWoOin8

i'm full of bullshit HUH??? not true HUH ??

fuck off!

[soapfiction]

Not buying it, pal. You can find extreme examples everywhere, and it doesn't say a thing about the military in general. If what you imply is true, there would be a military policy to only accept christians. You say he was 'kicked out'; not at all. The military provided a bodyguard to protect him from other soldiers, for crying out loud! It's the private organizations, not the military, that are religious. And your 'crusades' argument holds absolutely no water. Nor does the oil argument. Peace.

[xlioilx]

soapfiction no war for oil ok whatever go back to sleep bub

[niginit]

thank you.

[niginit]

did you want to cry now?

you've exhausted every other option.

america is a christian nation if you want to talk demographics and that christian nation will do anything it wants to with no oversight. this is more dangerous considering the power it wields.

need it spelled out for you?

go read a fucking book maybe?

[niginit]

you are obviously confused.

try again.

[bodeezy]

Christopher Hitchens rules.