Since WW2, the US has had one program or another to shut up the dissidents. Of course, to keep tourists, students and investors coming and to promote a democracy image around the world, they do it so quietly that most Americans aren't even aware that such programs exist. More recently such programs are run thru local law enforcement which as you expect are mostly terrorizing minorities. Look up GANG STALKING TV and MONARCH II (PT TWELVE) videos on YouTube. Targets are mostly web protestors.
If you say only one-tenth of this in the U.S., you'll find yourself in one of the following situations in the U.S., and you can search these videos under these key words on YouTube -- gang stalking, gang stalking TV, gang stalking survivor, cell phone stalking, Monarch II (pt twelve), tyrannical oppression, freedom's bloody corpse, backscatter x-ray, etc. Ever wonder why there are never any protests in the U.S.?
I agree with everything Hitchens said but his comment about women getting acid thrown in their faces made me feel a bit like wtf? Women in Iran never get acid thrown in their faces. That is a Pakistani custom, not Iranian.
I hate it when we are lumped into the same category as all the other Muslim countries when we are nothing like that! We are modern and civilized people.
Fucking prove it. Give the world at least one liberal-democratic nation with a Muslim majority.
I know and love many Muslims, but it is a regressive belief system and the sooner you own up to it and try to reform it, the better your people will be around the world, and the less we will have to hear about Islamic violence.
turkey is a pretty liberal country, Lebanon is getting there. But I do agree reform is badly needed in countries like the KSA, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, etc.
@DiscoballHerpes I don't know if one could call Turkey liberal, if you look at its treatment of political prisoners, Kurdish repression, occupation of Northern Cyprus not to mention the periodic military dictatorships which often interrupt the government... though I suppose compared to the rest of the Islamic world it is quite liberal (though only because Ataturk instituted a forcible 'Westernization' policy).
Lebanon used to have a Christian majority when Beirut was the "Paris of the East".
i thank them for supporting the green movement and i hope that they continue to do so, but they dont really know what their talking about. not in terms of fact...but in terms of context. they dont...and cant really understand the current state of iranian culture/politics......because they dont live it.
The blowhard on the left just wants Hitchens to criticize Obama. It's so obvious, he drops the name like five times. I doubt he actually cares about the situation in Iran (as Hitchens does).
You're right about that. What he knowingly understands but doesn't care about is that an endorsement from the west would be a death sentence to them. He just sees their problem as an opportunity to criticize those he doesn't like.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Iran is very similar to the United States in that the MILITARY in IRAN runs the country just like the MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX runs the US nad US Policy.
@Fattboy26 Really? Not nearly as serperate as I would like. We used to be (and supposed to still be) a Democratic Republic...not simply a democracy (rule of the majority).
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
There is no better way for Obama to help he Mullahs than to denounce them.
The Mullahs are claiming that the people who are demonstrating are agents of the US. There is absolutely no better way for Obama to help the Supreme Leader, by lending credibility to his arguments, and interfering in what is essentially an Iranian affair.
Hitchens is, as always, a total drunken moron who can't get anything right.
The problem is that we've used up credibility with things like overthrowing previous Iranian regimes, and several others throughout the world. If we were altruistic in wanting to help others achieve freedom, then proclamations of support would be legitimate and appropriate.
It is completely "legitimate and appropriate" to proclaim our support for true democratic process anywhere in the world, and only the more so if we have acted contrary to democratic principles in the past.
NOT doing so is what makes us look bad, and only gives legitimacy to this baltantly UN-democratic sham of an election.
You maybe disgusted by things the US has done in the past, but saying that we have no moral right to officially support democratic efforts is just ridiculous.
The problem is that we have long left the ideal of truly supporting democratic efforts in the dust. I think we ought to do it, however, things like only claiming the spread of democracy to Iraq after weapons of mass destruction were not found, and after we discover there was no Al Qaeda, and after there was no link to 9/11 is disingenuous, and makes any support of Iranian democracy immediately suspicious. We should support democracy, but do it even when they elect people we don't like
In that respect it is hardwired because we have evolved to co-exist in clans. Doing so greatly increases our chances of survival and reproduction. However, I dont think it is in our nature to invent or seek spiritual beings unless that behaviour is clan led. I hope you follow my logic.
Thats an interesting point but I do not fully agree with you. As social animals I accept that in times of need we seek sympathy and support from our peers. Religion is a common socially acceptable way of scratching that itch. Particularly if we have been nurtured that way.
Is anyone really trying to say that any election in any Muslim country can be called fair? Women have no choice. I'm not talking about a female educated middle class elite, but the vast majority of poor ill-educated slaves to fundamentalist women-controlling pin-head men.
And the reason it's an Islamic Theocracy is because of former presidents failing to do what Obama's doing right now - respecting the sovereignty of other nations.
Just a completely epic lapse in logic Christopher. You are letting your hate of theocracy and your narcissism of America cloud any rational thought you may have.
I agree totally. Furthermore, Iranian experts, like Karim Sadjadpur or Bruce Laingen, all support Obama's measured approach. Reza Azlan said yesterday that if America really wanted to end the Iranian opposition movement, then all it had to do was take McCain's advice & interfere (remember, McCains campaign used "bomb Iran" set to Beach Boys music as a slogan...does he really care for Iran's people?) Repubs forget Bush Sr's statement in '91 & the disastrous Shia Intifada that resulted in Iraq.
Furthermore, Iranian experts like Sadjadpour and Laingen fully agree with Obama with respect to the history of US involvent in Iran. That history is very real, and complicates whatever posture we take right now. One has to respond to, and be respectful of that history, rather than just being as brutish as Khamenei himself. Otherwise, we risk transgressing the truly indigenous heart of this movement in Iran.
Christopher Hitchens is a tool. This guy just does not get it; there is no difference between the Rafsanjani camp and those in the Khamenei camp. Zero, zilch, nada.
I usually don't agree with Hitchen's politics (I'm a socialist, basically), but this time he said something really true. I, too, am puzzled as to why Obama doesn't support the protesters. They're for democracy, and all they want is free and fair elections. Hopefully this will alter the view on Iranians in the West, as many of them are tired of the religious dogma and oppression. Unfortunately, I don't see the radical change coming yet in Iran. But this shows that Iranians have the potential.
No, that's not correct. He used to be a socialist, but as of 2009 he describes himself as a Marxist. But because of his support for globalization and capitalism, his critics have called him a neoconservative, even though he rejects that. But he's not a socalist.
As for Hitch on fascism- fascism came to Europe in the form of over-muscled soldiers wearing sleek uniforms and wielding the latest military technology, all under the sick delusion that they were on the right side of History. Just as Hitler had Riefenstahl to whitwash his bloody death machine in a sparkling light, George Bush & his cronies had Hitch to serve them the same way... "A war we can be proud of" the man gloats in wake of the Abu Gharaib scandal. He is in no position to judge anyone.
Sorry dear, congressmen might dis, but experts dont. Iranian American Karim Sadjadpour, who has been covering this issue, firmly stands with Obama. Bruce Laingen, one of the Embassy Hostages taken in the '79 revolution, also firmly supports Obama. Repubs want to rush in and start a full scale war... thats what results from their method. Consider Bush Sr. and the '91 Shia Intifada in Iraq. His Declaration sparked a bloodbath that he could legally do nothing about, even for the Shia.
And Kudlow,... well Kudlow is just a moron. Their little mutual hand-job session proves to be just a waste of time and air-space, aimed at flattering themselves. They arent concerned about Iranians, they just want to coopt the matter to attack Obama. Hitch is here as much a pawn and a prostitute to Kudlow as he was to the Bush administration with regards to Iraq. Thats no reflection on the Iranian protesters, who I admire and RESPECT. Hitch & Kud just want to use them for their own agendae.
Hitch proved to be miserably wrong with respect to Iraq, and he seemed to have no problem with Iraqi Shia militias loyal to Tehran only 6 years back (so much for the indignation at "exported terrorism"). He's as contradictory and militant as his fellow war-monger Jerry Falwell. And certainly, he proves that one doesnt need a god to have all the violence and despair that religion too often brings. His criticism of Obama is foolish, lacking in substance and completely snarky.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Finally, Hitch has hit a new low by this mutual hand-job session with a blathering idiot like Kudlow-- they way they troll like scavengers for something to criticize Obama on. All Hitch can muster is a the fact that Obama calls Iran an "Islamic Republic"... which is what it would be called (& those clerics would still be the main power-players) whether Ahmadinejad or Mouosavi wins the election. Hitch used to have some dignity... now he's a mess... and what a waste of air-time!!
If anyone has treated the public like children, its been Hitch and his buddies in the Bush Admn.... apparentlly, they all thought it was okay to lie to the public about WMDs just to get the war off the ground. Hitch knows this, and justifies it, saying that the lies dont matter as much as the result (which is at this point non-stop chaos and war) He's no different than his fellow war-monger, the bigot Ahmadinejad.
Also, its terribly hypocritical of Hitch to say that he opposes the exporting of terrorism from Iran, when back in 2003 he vocally supported Iraqi Shia militias that were openly recieving funding, and ideological support, from Iran. The same is true of the PKK, which incidently was designated a terrorist group by the very members of the Bush Admn to whom Hitch gave unwavering support for the invasion of Iraq. Hitch is as hypocritical and ignorant as his fellow war-monger, Jerry Falwell.
For one thing Hitch, Fascism came to Germany in the form of over-muscled soldiers wearing sleek uniforms and wielding the latest military technology, all under the delusion that they were on the righr side of History. Just as Hitler had Riefenstahl to whitwash his bloody death machine in a sparkling light, George Bush & his cronies had Hitch to make their invasion of Iraq seem so necessary, inevitable and noble... "A war we can be proud of" the man says in wake of the Abu Gharaib scandal.
The way the protesters in Iran are being treated right now, is worse than Abu Gharib or guantanamo. My friend's nephew only just turned 18, both his legs were broken, one arm broken, taser and cigarette burns all up and down his back, and the only reason he survived is because the kid's uncle works in the government and was able to identify his nephew, his mother creid out front of the jail for 3 days until they released him, and he had to be rushed to the hospital, near death...
I truly wish the best for your friends son, and hope that he can heal and recover, and, with the rest of the Persian people, arise to a new and better Iran.
I'm not suggesting the yankees should go in and do anything about it, far from it, but the way the government has treated the protesters is both criminal, and unethical. the regime deserves to fall, and I hope the Persian people will over throw their corrupt government.
LeGion, I am so sorry for your friend, & I agree with you totally about Ahmadinejad's government. I too wish only the best for the Persian people. I only meant to point out the shameful posture that Hitch is taking, playing Roxanna to Kudlows Jack van Impe. & to fault Obama for using the term "Islamic Republic" is absurd... thats not what the issue in Iran is. Obama's position is as wise as it should be with respect to the context surrounding this conflict.
I agree thats just Hitch and his irrational fear of religion, I don't have a problem with Obama's position as a Candian, but I do know Persians that want a more open show of support from him, but in my mind they don't need him. They can do this on their own.
I wouldn't say Hitchens has a "fear" of religion. It would say it's more like contempt or hatred. At it's a rational hatred, not an irrational one. Religion is one of the biggest problems in our modern times.
Religion is a problem like dirivng cars is a problem, nothing is going to change it. our nature is our problem not the bullshit justifications we use to indulge our warlike nature. eliminating religion wouldn't fix any of the problems mankind faces, because these are isssue we deal with because of our makeup. We are hardwired to be this way.
no, but people will kill people and blame it on whatever they need to. if there was no religion it would be over politics, or point of view, or over what colours you wear in which neighbourhood .... you get what I am saying ?
Humanity will control or displace anything that gets in its way to doing whatever it is we want to do, even if we have to run over fellow people to get what we want, this is humanity's nature, get used to it, its not going to change.
I get what you're saying, but I just don't share your apathetic mindset. Even though death and strife are absolutes, changes can still be utilized to reform the evils of religion, bigotry, racism, etc. Just because humans naturally kill each other in conflics doesn't mean it shouldn't be sought to preven it, or, at the very least, minimize the extent of it.
I agree, I just don't think those things can be done in a free society without some form of control. religion is one, and the state is another. I would rather voluntary control through religion instead of mandated control and loss of freedom through the governemnt. Mind you its not an either or option, there could be another way, we just don't have it yet.
I understand your point, I see it clearly. However, you forget about evolution. We are changing! I'm not hardwired to be religious. Many seem to be but I'm not.
Additionaly, I have reproduced and none of my 4 boys are religious. Social evolution or dumping the hard wire?
I disagree, heterosexuality is hardwired into all of us in order to propagate the species, yet roughly 5% of the population is homosexual. there are always anomalies and not all of us have the exact same hardwiring, or respond to our hardwiring in the same way. given terminal disease or disaster and great loss, many seek some form of religion or spirituality, and that is evidence of the hardwiring at least on a basic level.
my point is that we may rise above or ignore our hardwiring, but because the majority of aboriginal and indiginous peoples have some form of deity worship or spirituality I would say it is hardwired on some basic level. Not what we believe but that we do believe in something beyond us.
Why is Kudlow shouting ? To me it makes him appear a sensationalist, and distracts me from actually listening to anything he says. By contrast, Hitchens is so calmly spoken and erudite.
If you listen to any public intellectual, listen to Christopher Hitchens! He never says anything in order to make anyone love him. This is precisely why I love him so.
Obama's vocal support for the people of Iran would do squat for them. All it would do is give Ahmadinejad fuel to paint these protests as being an American plot. The US government has been behind the overthrow of so many democratic states that Obama's support would be a joke.
I have walked that long road to freedom.I have tried not to falter;I have made missteps along the way.But I ve discovered the secret that after climbing a great hill,one only finds that there are many more hills to climb. I have taken a moment here to rest, to steal a view of the glorious vista that surrounds me, to look back on the distance I have come. But I can only rest for a moment,forwith freedom comes/Neslon Mandela
just mention the name golloway to hitchens and see how he runs.the man is an idiot.how people call him a analysts god knows.the man was a hot blooded communist during vietnam war and now a neocon.what a creep.just watch his dabate against galloway.
Yes. I have seen the debate in which Hitchens crushes the loud-mouthed and ad-hominem filled Galloway. Honestly, how could you support such a vile human being as Galloway? I could understand perhaps someone like Ritter (a much better opponent against Hitchens), but supporting Galloway is almost debauched considering his subservience to the despots and tyrants in the Middle East and South America.
Pro freedom? Please. The US is one of the most fascistic countries on the planet. Millions killed millions jailed, taxed at the threat of violence how dare they crit another country.
Actually, Obama is playing a very careful strategy. If he intervenes diplomatically / militarily in Iran, the Iranian regime will identify the current democratic rumblings with the US (as they are currently attempting). This will give them the leverage they require to crush the current defiance.
Interference right now would be a terrible move. Obama is playing it exactly right. This is an issue internal to Iran, and does not warrant international interference, frustrating though that is.
Did anyone invade the UK when the Police accidentally killed and injured some G8 protestors recently?
The pictures coming from Iran are dramatic. The scenes, horrible. The treatment of the people, unimaginable. But this is still an internal Iranian issue.
These situations have happened many times in history, and is well mirrored in the film 'V' for Vendetta:
"People shouldn't be afraid of their Governments. Governments should be afraid of their people"
Precisely because of what Hitchens says. Iran's sham of a leadership is exporting it's theocratic lunacy through Hesbullah and Hamas. The UK isn't trying to acquire nukes with the intent to give these crazies the ability to use them. Iran or at least Ahmadinejad and his goons are. There is a huge difference between this and the G8. Wake up.
If you can't note the discrepency between a small, singular, sanguinary conflict involving British police and protestors and that of a scam election in which the casualty numbers inflicted by police are now totaling over 150, then you can't be reasoned with. Your premise is fatuous.
My point was purely illustrative. The behaviour Iranians in their protests has been exemplary, though there has been sporadic incidences of violence / property destruction.
The Basiji goons that are terrorising the people - if you know anything about Iran - terrorise the people all the time. My former partner was Iranian, and the stories she can tell still curl my toes.
History shows that these situations require no trigger-happy external influence. The theocracy will collapse on its own.
i dont remember saying anything about invading iran, and i do understand the argument of trying not to take sides so that theocracy cant accuse the demonstrators of being 'proxies of the west, bad bad usa bla bla'
i will say that obama's cairo speech was very troubling to me, i thought it unnecessarily panderered to religious beliefs which frankly we need less of in the 21st century, not more.
furthermore, its not too much to ask , for the president of a country whose own constitution supposedly seperates church and state, to advocate that policy to the rest of the world.
Although I am an atheist, I realize Obama did what he had to do. First off the middle east is a complete mess. Obama does not want to be advocating policies to people not willing to listen. Also the point of the Cairo speech was to reach out to the Muslim world and not to aggravate them with more of our "superior" policies. Obama is playing it safe here, do we really need to make another batch of pissed off Muslims?
Christopher Hitchens nailed it. Iran is a fascist state ruled by religious thugs. I hope that Khamenei and his lapdog Ahmadinejad are brought down -- if not now, then very soon.
Why are people surprised by Obamas position? He has not even spoken out against Saudi Arabia or Qatar's absolute monarchy rule where they don't even have elections. It would be hypocrisy at its greatest levels and the decision would be selective and arbitrary itself.
Only the retarded sector of our population thinks Obama should take a side...the rest of us who read and think know better. It's ironic how those who argued we should bomb or invade Iran with no regard to the fate of t's people, now want to free them..lol
There's the argument that says if Obama did come out on the side of the opposition then it would give the fucks in power in Iran propaganda. They could say the opposition are puppets of the west etc.
ali khamenei and ahmadinejad will soon be licking dogs asses in hell
ali khamenei and ahmadinejad should go out tomorrow and face the people. they wont, they are total cowards and would rather slaughter their countrymen than to give up their power and greed
That's funny. Kudlow is an old kooch who sounds like Phil Hartmann on SNL. Kudlow is annoying as hell and Hitchens is now questioning why he voted for Obama. And I am Hitchens biggest fan. The Rapture is coming my friends. visit my channel.
It seems like many of my fellow Americans are very stupid and ignorant of history. Iran had a democratic government once-- it overthrew the Shah, but then tried to nationalize Iran's oil resources. So the CIA, under Pres. Eisenhower went in and toppled the popularly elected Prime Minister Mohammand Mossadegh. We put the Shah back on the throne. It was a direct line from that act to the seizure of power by the Mullahs-- who incidentally had opposed Mossadegh for not imposing Sharia law. So STFU.
Obama is showing a very disturbing trend: he consistently sides with dictatorships and enemies of the USA, while marginalizing and mistreating the allies of America and those who share our values and ideals, such as these young Iranians thriving to live free in a representative democracy, where they can live in prosperity, modernity and be empowered and lived with dignity and honor, not like peons in some backwards and barbaric theocratic dictatorship. Shame on Obama and his hysteric supporters!
God forbid a leftist would side with personal freedom and individual liberty or the fight for democracy, self-determination and personal empowerment and emancipation from ANY government... the left believes that the individual finds freedom through government help... the right believes that it is government itself that, as a system, is wired to control every aspect of people's lives, treating us like children... a soft or a hard tyranny.
The left systematically sides with wrong, failed or evil.
Which makes it all the more starnge that you say you "love" Hitchens. Hitchens is pro-universal healthcare, pro-immigration, pro-government environmental regulation concerning global warming, pro-drug decriminalization, anti-religious right, a critic of Reagan, and so on...
Perhaps you should read a bit more about Hitchens before gleefully declaring your "love" for someone that counters so many of your views.
We can't let the fact that the Iranian election occurs in a non-democratic theocratic Islamic dictatorship elude us. Blaming Jews, the CIA or whatever other half-cooked, self-serving and a bit too convenient conspiracy theory for comfort won't change the inescapable fact that this Iranian generation wants modernity, individual freedom and personal liberty all the while keeping Islam and Persia as beautiful vestiges of their great civilization, a bit like Japan has been able to do with success.
Now I know why I don't watch Cable news. Kudlow is a twit with his bating questions and Hitchens isn't biting. I don't always agree with Hitchens, but he's smart and dignified.
As much as I support the prospect of democracy in Iran, I disagree with the proposition that Obama should try to get involved because it would be too easy for the Iranian government to use for propaganda purposes. He should do what George Bush the first did when the Iron Curtain fell... just sit back and let history take it's course.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The hypocrite hitchens again... isn't this the same writer of the column titled "Haha to the Pacifists" - where he ridiculed the anti-Bush and anti-war protesters .. apparently, it's ok to protest if it is against the official enemy.. raising a mirror to ourselves is uncivilized.
fame and fortune to those who write against the official enemies
Reminds me of a Family Guy episode : (cockney accent) "Look everybody, Ringo wrote a song! That's veeery, veeery good, Ringo! Let's put this up on the refrigerator!"
what if in the 2000 election china or some other country came over here and said that gore will b the president of the US i hate bush but would that b ok? we should stay out of peoples shit the iranian people will over thow him if they want 2
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
The BBC have been caught faking pics of Iranian protesters once again. So who really knows what's propaganda and what's legit anymore? Shame but true.
Of the Hitchens brothers though, I more likely to be interested in what Peter has to say.
The careless and distorted emphasis on ethnic voting cited by writers from the Financial Times and New York Times to justify calling Ahmadinejad s victory a stolen vote is matched by the medias willful and deliberate refusal to acknowledge a rigorous nationwide public opinion poll conducted by two US experts just three weeks before the vote, which showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin even larger than his electoral victory on June 12.
This poll revealed that among ethnic Azeris, Ahmadinejad was favored by a 2 to 1 margin over Mousavi, demonstrating how class interests represented by one candidate can overcome the ethnic identity of the other candidate (Washington Post June 15, 2009).
I wouldn't want to be governed by him, but that isn't the point, the point is the propaganda and corporate media are running wild but they don't provide any real EVIDENCE the election was stolen, and while the Obama administration says it doesn't want to meddle in Iranian affairs, they are hard at work try to destabilize the country, it's hypocrisy.
Why must the host shout all the time? It makes it so hard to listen and think to the content.
PlatesManUK 18 hours ago
Kudrow needs to shut up. He kept trying to force his agenda in there, while Hitchens kept trying to talk. It pissed me off.
Newenlightenmentnow 9 months ago
since when is hitchens a iran expert?
Nawidyeah 1 year ago
Since WW2, the US has had one program or another to shut up the dissidents. Of course, to keep tourists, students and investors coming and to promote a democracy image around the world, they do it so quietly that most Americans aren't even aware that such programs exist. More recently such programs are run thru local law enforcement which as you expect are mostly terrorizing minorities. Look up GANG STALKING TV and MONARCH II (PT TWELVE) videos on YouTube. Targets are mostly web protestors.
1975Aspen 1 year ago
hitchens called that one
VarialProductions 1 year ago
Why does the presenter have to shout? Does he not realise the invention of audio technology?
ihatelumberjacks 1 year ago
because he is american
gujjucheap 1 year ago
@ihatelumberjacks I know- he hurts my ears!
writersblock26 10 months ago
If you say only one-tenth of this in the U.S., you'll find yourself in one of the following situations in the U.S., and you can search these videos under these key words on YouTube -- gang stalking, gang stalking TV, gang stalking survivor, cell phone stalking, Monarch II (pt twelve), tyrannical oppression, freedom's bloody corpse, backscatter x-ray, etc. Ever wonder why there are never any protests in the U.S.?
1975Aspen 1 year ago
there are plenty of protests in the US... what ARE you talking about?
VarialProductions 1 year ago
@1975Aspen Bullshit.
swampdonkey152000 1 year ago
HEY - Dont disturb Pres.Obama, He is Golfing!!!!
diceyLee 1 year ago
This kudlow guy has an obnoxious voice. I can't bear to listen to him.
annaknowsu 1 year ago
I'm addicted to Christopher Hitchens.
DarkAngelSupreme 1 year ago
that newsanchor sounds like such an idiot. i feel sorry for hitchens having to deal with him.
up2trix 1 year ago
kudlow doesn't care about iran at all. He just wanted to get worked up over Obama
karan1511 1 year ago
Another victory for Islam Yea!
grinningchicken 1 year ago
the hysterical interviewer wouldnt be out of place in the iranian parliament with the fanatical clerics....
ninodelbayble 1 year ago
I agree with everything Hitchens said but his comment about women getting acid thrown in their faces made me feel a bit like wtf? Women in Iran never get acid thrown in their faces. That is a Pakistani custom, not Iranian.
I hate it when we are lumped into the same category as all the other Muslim countries when we are nothing like that! We are modern and civilized people.
Mahdavi1990 1 year ago
Fucking prove it. Give the world at least one liberal-democratic nation with a Muslim majority.
I know and love many Muslims, but it is a regressive belief system and the sooner you own up to it and try to reform it, the better your people will be around the world, and the less we will have to hear about Islamic violence.
MattyJames25 1 year ago 6
@MattyJames25
turkey is a pretty liberal country, Lebanon is getting there. But I do agree reform is badly needed in countries like the KSA, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran, etc.
DiscoballHerpes 1 year ago
@DiscoballHerpes I don't know if one could call Turkey liberal, if you look at its treatment of political prisoners, Kurdish repression, occupation of Northern Cyprus not to mention the periodic military dictatorships which often interrupt the government... though I suppose compared to the rest of the Islamic world it is quite liberal (though only because Ataturk instituted a forcible 'Westernization' policy).
Lebanon used to have a Christian majority when Beirut was the "Paris of the East".
MattyJames25 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MattyJames25
Wherever muslims are the majority there is no freedom
Fattboy26 1 year ago
@DiscoballHerpes
Lebanon was there before the muslims became the majority this should be a lesson for the West.
Fattboy26 1 year ago
i thank them for supporting the green movement and i hope that they continue to do so, but they dont really know what their talking about. not in terms of fact...but in terms of context. they dont...and cant really understand the current state of iranian culture/politics......because they dont live it.
theblindowl2 2 years ago
The blowhard on the left just wants Hitchens to criticize Obama. It's so obvious, he drops the name like five times. I doubt he actually cares about the situation in Iran (as Hitchens does).
VesusSheist 2 years ago
You're right about that. What he knowingly understands but doesn't care about is that an endorsement from the west would be a death sentence to them. He just sees their problem as an opportunity to criticize those he doesn't like.
SporeConvergence 1 year ago
What will we do after Hitchens? I hope he is my father in my next life.
finalprophet10 2 years ago 20
@finalprophet10 He's not gone yet.
tylerdurden4495 1 year ago
@finalprophet10 If you do get another life, don't count on Hitchens being there.
swampdonkey152000 1 year ago 2
lets not forget operation ajax. without that iran would have democracy... thanks Britain.
bonfirejovi 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Iran is very similar to the United States in that the MILITARY in IRAN runs the country just like the MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX runs the US nad US Policy.
StairillDaryl 2 years ago
elaborate. .
theonemanparty7 2 years ago
USA is a democracy not a theocracy. There is a seperation of church and state.
Fattboy26 2 years ago 28
@Fattboy26 Really? Not nearly as serperate as I would like. We used to be (and supposed to still be) a Democratic Republic...not simply a democracy (rule of the majority).
gary031183 1 year ago
@Fattboy26 except when the republicans are in charge.
censorshipshit 1 year ago
@Fattboy26 republic actually
redryan20000 9 months ago
@redryan20000
Your right.
Fattboy26 9 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
There is no better way for Obama to help he Mullahs than to denounce them.
The Mullahs are claiming that the people who are demonstrating are agents of the US. There is absolutely no better way for Obama to help the Supreme Leader, by lending credibility to his arguments, and interfering in what is essentially an Iranian affair.
Hitchens is, as always, a total drunken moron who can't get anything right.
Wrong on Iraq. Wong on Iran. Simple as that.
poyani 2 years ago
i agree. Maybe they think we should bomb & kill them----you know, start another war?
mogem 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Why doesn't historical revisionist Christopher
Hitchens change his forename? CHRISTopher
means : Bearer of Christ.
LovingKimiKatkar 2 years ago
ain't for the US to meddle with
mongobobo 2 years ago
The problem is that we've used up credibility with things like overthrowing previous Iranian regimes, and several others throughout the world. If we were altruistic in wanting to help others achieve freedom, then proclamations of support would be legitimate and appropriate.
vatoencabronado 2 years ago
vato-
It is completely "legitimate and appropriate" to proclaim our support for true democratic process anywhere in the world, and only the more so if we have acted contrary to democratic principles in the past.
NOT doing so is what makes us look bad, and only gives legitimacy to this baltantly UN-democratic sham of an election.
You maybe disgusted by things the US has done in the past, but saying that we have no moral right to officially support democratic efforts is just ridiculous.
StevoDog21 2 years ago
The problem is that we have long left the ideal of truly supporting democratic efforts in the dust. I think we ought to do it, however, things like only claiming the spread of democracy to Iraq after weapons of mass destruction were not found, and after we discover there was no Al Qaeda, and after there was no link to 9/11 is disingenuous, and makes any support of Iranian democracy immediately suspicious. We should support democracy, but do it even when they elect people we don't like
vatoencabronado 2 years ago
Kudlow,
Thank you. thank you to those who are calling :
"where is Human Rights people"??
for heaven-sake this regime came to power by cry of "Human Rights" by Mr. Jimmy Carter the president!!! where is he??
Mahdi2c 2 years ago
Thank you for posting your thoughts. I have enjoyed the exchange.
FLUSEM666 2 years ago
In that respect it is hardwired because we have evolved to co-exist in clans. Doing so greatly increases our chances of survival and reproduction. However, I dont think it is in our nature to invent or seek spiritual beings unless that behaviour is clan led. I hope you follow my logic.
FLUSEM666 2 years ago
Thats an interesting point but I do not fully agree with you. As social animals I accept that in times of need we seek sympathy and support from our peers. Religion is a common socially acceptable way of scratching that itch. Particularly if we have been nurtured that way.
FLUSEM666 2 years ago
Why does the media care about Iran election but covered up Bush/Florida fraud? HYPOCRISY!
stophypocrisy 2 years ago 2
Is anyone really trying to say that any election in any Muslim country can be called fair? Women have no choice. I'm not talking about a female educated middle class elite, but the vast majority of poor ill-educated slaves to fundamentalist women-controlling pin-head men.
SteveArpo 2 years ago
And the reason it's an Islamic Theocracy is because of former presidents failing to do what Obama's doing right now - respecting the sovereignty of other nations.
Just a completely epic lapse in logic Christopher. You are letting your hate of theocracy and your narcissism of America cloud any rational thought you may have.
JimmyeDallas 2 years ago 2
I agree totally. Furthermore, Iranian experts, like Karim Sadjadpur or Bruce Laingen, all support Obama's measured approach. Reza Azlan said yesterday that if America really wanted to end the Iranian opposition movement, then all it had to do was take McCain's advice & interfere (remember, McCains campaign used "bomb Iran" set to Beach Boys music as a slogan...does he really care for Iran's people?) Repubs forget Bush Sr's statement in '91 & the disastrous Shia Intifada that resulted in Iraq.
martianluv 2 years ago
Furthermore, Iranian experts like Sadjadpour and Laingen fully agree with Obama with respect to the history of US involvent in Iran. That history is very real, and complicates whatever posture we take right now. One has to respond to, and be respectful of that history, rather than just being as brutish as Khamenei himself. Otherwise, we risk transgressing the truly indigenous heart of this movement in Iran.
martianluv 2 years ago
whooo! morocco! the pricks came dead last the last week's elections!
redabenjfk 2 years ago
Kudlow's whining almost makes me want to support Ahmadinejad. Obama has the right approach
LoLzZ85 2 years ago
Obama's approach-- right on the money!
P1915 2 years ago 2
Christopher Hitchens is a tool. This guy just does not get it; there is no difference between the Rafsanjani camp and those in the Khamenei camp. Zero, zilch, nada.
shanguelei 2 years ago
I usually don't agree with Hitchen's politics (I'm a socialist, basically), but this time he said something really true. I, too, am puzzled as to why Obama doesn't support the protesters. They're for democracy, and all they want is free and fair elections. Hopefully this will alter the view on Iranians in the West, as many of them are tired of the religious dogma and oppression. Unfortunately, I don't see the radical change coming yet in Iran. But this shows that Iranians have the potential.
oabrahamsson 2 years ago
Hitchens is a socialist
markinu 2 years ago
No, that's not correct. He used to be a socialist, but as of 2009 he describes himself as a Marxist. But because of his support for globalization and capitalism, his critics have called him a neoconservative, even though he rejects that. But he's not a socalist.
oabrahamsson 2 years ago
As for Hitch on fascism- fascism came to Europe in the form of over-muscled soldiers wearing sleek uniforms and wielding the latest military technology, all under the sick delusion that they were on the right side of History. Just as Hitler had Riefenstahl to whitwash his bloody death machine in a sparkling light, George Bush & his cronies had Hitch to serve them the same way... "A war we can be proud of" the man gloats in wake of the Abu Gharaib scandal. He is in no position to judge anyone.
martianluv 2 years ago
Even democratic congressmen would disagree with Obama, moron
markinu 2 years ago
Sorry dear, congressmen might dis, but experts dont. Iranian American Karim Sadjadpour, who has been covering this issue, firmly stands with Obama. Bruce Laingen, one of the Embassy Hostages taken in the '79 revolution, also firmly supports Obama. Repubs want to rush in and start a full scale war... thats what results from their method. Consider Bush Sr. and the '91 Shia Intifada in Iraq. His Declaration sparked a bloodbath that he could legally do nothing about, even for the Shia.
martianluv 2 years ago
And Kudlow,... well Kudlow is just a moron. Their little mutual hand-job session proves to be just a waste of time and air-space, aimed at flattering themselves. They arent concerned about Iranians, they just want to coopt the matter to attack Obama. Hitch is here as much a pawn and a prostitute to Kudlow as he was to the Bush administration with regards to Iraq. Thats no reflection on the Iranian protesters, who I admire and RESPECT. Hitch & Kud just want to use them for their own agendae.
martianluv 2 years ago
Hitchens supports Obama moron. Truth is truth.
markinu 2 years ago
Hitch proved to be miserably wrong with respect to Iraq, and he seemed to have no problem with Iraqi Shia militias loyal to Tehran only 6 years back (so much for the indignation at "exported terrorism"). He's as contradictory and militant as his fellow war-monger Jerry Falwell. And certainly, he proves that one doesnt need a god to have all the violence and despair that religion too often brings. His criticism of Obama is foolish, lacking in substance and completely snarky.
martianluv 2 years ago
Jesus, Kudlow's screeching voice cuts right through my head
emkultra 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Finally, Hitch has hit a new low by this mutual hand-job session with a blathering idiot like Kudlow-- they way they troll like scavengers for something to criticize Obama on. All Hitch can muster is a the fact that Obama calls Iran an "Islamic Republic"... which is what it would be called (& those clerics would still be the main power-players) whether Ahmadinejad or Mouosavi wins the election. Hitch used to have some dignity... now he's a mess... and what a waste of air-time!!
martianluv 2 years ago
If anyone has treated the public like children, its been Hitch and his buddies in the Bush Admn.... apparentlly, they all thought it was okay to lie to the public about WMDs just to get the war off the ground. Hitch knows this, and justifies it, saying that the lies dont matter as much as the result (which is at this point non-stop chaos and war) He's no different than his fellow war-monger, the bigot Ahmadinejad.
martianluv 2 years ago
Also, its terribly hypocritical of Hitch to say that he opposes the exporting of terrorism from Iran, when back in 2003 he vocally supported Iraqi Shia militias that were openly recieving funding, and ideological support, from Iran. The same is true of the PKK, which incidently was designated a terrorist group by the very members of the Bush Admn to whom Hitch gave unwavering support for the invasion of Iraq. Hitch is as hypocritical and ignorant as his fellow war-monger, Jerry Falwell.
martianluv 2 years ago
For one thing Hitch, Fascism came to Germany in the form of over-muscled soldiers wearing sleek uniforms and wielding the latest military technology, all under the delusion that they were on the righr side of History. Just as Hitler had Riefenstahl to whitwash his bloody death machine in a sparkling light, George Bush & his cronies had Hitch to make their invasion of Iraq seem so necessary, inevitable and noble... "A war we can be proud of" the man says in wake of the Abu Gharaib scandal.
martianluv 2 years ago
The way the protesters in Iran are being treated right now, is worse than Abu Gharib or guantanamo. My friend's nephew only just turned 18, both his legs were broken, one arm broken, taser and cigarette burns all up and down his back, and the only reason he survived is because the kid's uncle works in the government and was able to identify his nephew, his mother creid out front of the jail for 3 days until they released him, and he had to be rushed to the hospital, near death...
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
I truly wish the best for your friends son, and hope that he can heal and recover, and, with the rest of the Persian people, arise to a new and better Iran.
martianluv 2 years ago
I second that sentiment
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
I'm not suggesting the yankees should go in and do anything about it, far from it, but the way the government has treated the protesters is both criminal, and unethical. the regime deserves to fall, and I hope the Persian people will over throw their corrupt government.
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
LeGion, I am so sorry for your friend, & I agree with you totally about Ahmadinejad's government. I too wish only the best for the Persian people. I only meant to point out the shameful posture that Hitch is taking, playing Roxanna to Kudlows Jack van Impe. & to fault Obama for using the term "Islamic Republic" is absurd... thats not what the issue in Iran is. Obama's position is as wise as it should be with respect to the context surrounding this conflict.
martianluv 2 years ago
I agree thats just Hitch and his irrational fear of religion, I don't have a problem with Obama's position as a Candian, but I do know Persians that want a more open show of support from him, but in my mind they don't need him. They can do this on their own.
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago 2
I wouldn't say Hitchens has a "fear" of religion. It would say it's more like contempt or hatred. At it's a rational hatred, not an irrational one. Religion is one of the biggest problems in our modern times.
KajiCarson 2 years ago 3
Religion is a problem like dirivng cars is a problem, nothing is going to change it. our nature is our problem not the bullshit justifications we use to indulge our warlike nature. eliminating religion wouldn't fix any of the problems mankind faces, because these are isssue we deal with because of our makeup. We are hardwired to be this way.
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
That is no justification for humans to kill each other over superstitious minutiae.
KajiCarson 2 years ago 2
no, but people will kill people and blame it on whatever they need to. if there was no religion it would be over politics, or point of view, or over what colours you wear in which neighbourhood .... you get what I am saying ?
Humanity will control or displace anything that gets in its way to doing whatever it is we want to do, even if we have to run over fellow people to get what we want, this is humanity's nature, get used to it, its not going to change.
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
I get what you're saying, but I just don't share your apathetic mindset. Even though death and strife are absolutes, changes can still be utilized to reform the evils of religion, bigotry, racism, etc. Just because humans naturally kill each other in conflics doesn't mean it shouldn't be sought to preven it, or, at the very least, minimize the extent of it.
KajiCarson 2 years ago
I agree, I just don't think those things can be done in a free society without some form of control. religion is one, and the state is another. I would rather voluntary control through religion instead of mandated control and loss of freedom through the governemnt. Mind you its not an either or option, there could be another way, we just don't have it yet.
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
I understand your point, I see it clearly. However, you forget about evolution. We are changing! I'm not hardwired to be religious. Many seem to be but I'm not.
Additionaly, I have reproduced and none of my 4 boys are religious. Social evolution or dumping the hard wire?
FLUSEM666 2 years ago
I disagree, heterosexuality is hardwired into all of us in order to propagate the species, yet roughly 5% of the population is homosexual. there are always anomalies and not all of us have the exact same hardwiring, or respond to our hardwiring in the same way. given terminal disease or disaster and great loss, many seek some form of religion or spirituality, and that is evidence of the hardwiring at least on a basic level.
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
my point is that we may rise above or ignore our hardwiring, but because the majority of aboriginal and indiginous peoples have some form of deity worship or spirituality I would say it is hardwired on some basic level. Not what we believe but that we do believe in something beyond us.
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
Why is Kudlow shouting ? To me it makes him appear a sensationalist, and distracts me from actually listening to anything he says. By contrast, Hitchens is so calmly spoken and erudite.
zybisko 2 years ago
well, too bad both are sensationalists.
marderend 2 years ago
Hitchens rules, Kudlow is annoying.
csxtrainwreck 2 years ago 2
Maybe if I become a fascist people will like me.
45erwx7 2 years ago
If you listen to any public intellectual, listen to Christopher Hitchens! He never says anything in order to make anyone love him. This is precisely why I love him so.
bfirepllc 2 years ago
It's good to see Phil Hartman back from the dead and working.
mavaddat 2 years ago 2
Obama's vocal support for the people of Iran would do squat for them. All it would do is give Ahmadinejad fuel to paint these protests as being an American plot. The US government has been behind the overthrow of so many democratic states that Obama's support would be a joke.
BubbaGump332 2 years ago
Obama wont support the protests in public because he doesn't want them to be open to the charge that they are his "tools" and "proxies"...
david552 2 years ago 2
I have walked that long road to freedom.I have tried not to falter;I have made missteps along the way.But I ve discovered the secret that after climbing a great hill,one only finds that there are many more hills to climb. I have taken a moment here to rest, to steal a view of the glorious vista that surrounds me, to look back on the distance I have come. But I can only rest for a moment,forwith freedom comes/Neslon Mandela
dirty khamenai leave Iran
ahmadi nejad u are terrorist
shy shy shy
aivensimonian 2 years ago
just mention the name golloway to hitchens and see how he runs.the man is an idiot.how people call him a analysts god knows.the man was a hot blooded communist during vietnam war and now a neocon.what a creep.just watch his dabate against galloway.
zadeh100 2 years ago
I've changed my past opinions, but I've yet to be accused of being a creep because of it.
scythe747 2 years ago
Yes. I have seen the debate in which Hitchens crushes the loud-mouthed and ad-hominem filled Galloway. Honestly, how could you support such a vile human being as Galloway? I could understand perhaps someone like Ritter (a much better opponent against Hitchens), but supporting Galloway is almost debauched considering his subservience to the despots and tyrants in the Middle East and South America.
Mike3303 2 years ago
god what a fucking annoying interviewer. shut your loud mouth and let hitchens speak you useless dork
belzondium 2 years ago
Pro freedom? Please. The US is one of the most fascistic countries on the planet. Millions killed millions jailed, taxed at the threat of violence how dare they crit another country.
ocelot814 2 years ago
Comment removed
jbthepianist 2 years ago
this fucking cnbc person. calm down and stop acting like a douche.
sugmegpls 2 years ago 3
obama's turning out to be a brown-nosing apologist for religious nuts
phuturexy 2 years ago
Actually, Obama is playing a very careful strategy. If he intervenes diplomatically / militarily in Iran, the Iranian regime will identify the current democratic rumblings with the US (as they are currently attempting). This will give them the leverage they require to crush the current defiance.
Interference right now would be a terrible move. Obama is playing it exactly right. This is an issue internal to Iran, and does not warrant international interference, frustrating though that is.
peterhent 2 years ago
Did anyone invade the UK when the Police accidentally killed and injured some G8 protestors recently?
The pictures coming from Iran are dramatic. The scenes, horrible. The treatment of the people, unimaginable. But this is still an internal Iranian issue.
These situations have happened many times in history, and is well mirrored in the film 'V' for Vendetta:
"People shouldn't be afraid of their Governments. Governments should be afraid of their people"
peterhent 2 years ago
Precisely because of what Hitchens says. Iran's sham of a leadership is exporting it's theocratic lunacy through Hesbullah and Hamas. The UK isn't trying to acquire nukes with the intent to give these crazies the ability to use them. Iran or at least Ahmadinejad and his goons are. There is a huge difference between this and the G8. Wake up.
bt770 2 years ago 3
If you can't note the discrepency between a small, singular, sanguinary conflict involving British police and protestors and that of a scam election in which the casualty numbers inflicted by police are now totaling over 150, then you can't be reasoned with. Your premise is fatuous.
Mike3303 2 years ago 2
My point was purely illustrative. The behaviour Iranians in their protests has been exemplary, though there has been sporadic incidences of violence / property destruction.
The Basiji goons that are terrorising the people - if you know anything about Iran - terrorise the people all the time. My former partner was Iranian, and the stories she can tell still curl my toes.
History shows that these situations require no trigger-happy external influence. The theocracy will collapse on its own.
peterhent 2 years ago
i dont remember saying anything about invading iran, and i do understand the argument of trying not to take sides so that theocracy cant accuse the demonstrators of being 'proxies of the west, bad bad usa bla bla'
i will say that obama's cairo speech was very troubling to me, i thought it unnecessarily panderered to religious beliefs which frankly we need less of in the 21st century, not more.
phuturexy 2 years ago
furthermore, its not too much to ask , for the president of a country whose own constitution supposedly seperates church and state, to advocate that policy to the rest of the world.
phuturexy 2 years ago
Although I am an atheist, I realize Obama did what he had to do. First off the middle east is a complete mess. Obama does not want to be advocating policies to people not willing to listen. Also the point of the Cairo speech was to reach out to the Muslim world and not to aggravate them with more of our "superior" policies. Obama is playing it safe here, do we really need to make another batch of pissed off Muslims?
nebras 2 years ago
Christopher Hitchens nailed it. Iran is a fascist state ruled by religious thugs. I hope that Khamenei and his lapdog Ahmadinejad are brought down -- if not now, then very soon.
GreatOneFan 2 years ago
It would be nice if he didn't fawn over Hitchens- "Your wonderful to help us out" "You know a lot more about it than I do" It's embarrassing
murrayp4 2 years ago
Remember kids, the louder you shout, the more correct you are.
Strattonus 2 years ago
Yeap))))
Fleshious 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Where is the BOTTLE OF WHISKY, Christopher? You're a washed-up useless fucking drunk.
MarshallKutuzov 2 years ago
Why are people surprised by Obamas position? He has not even spoken out against Saudi Arabia or Qatar's absolute monarchy rule where they don't even have elections. It would be hypocrisy at its greatest levels and the decision would be selective and arbitrary itself.
nebras 2 years ago 3
Good point
UppruniTegundanna 2 years ago
Obama really needs to get on top of this situation and the sooner the better.
tigerdraft 2 years ago
Obama really is a wimp. He's afraid to take sides in any principled way, as if trying to curry favor from the mullahs will get us anything anyways.
If your going to be a brown-noser, at least figure out what's in it for you.
charlesvan13 2 years ago
Only the retarded sector of our population thinks Obama should take a side...the rest of us who read and think know better. It's ironic how those who argued we should bomb or invade Iran with no regard to the fate of t's people, now want to free them..lol
DelinquentFaith 2 years ago 2
Ah, yes. Because complacency and indifference to the world is every scholar's form of logic.
Mike3303 2 years ago
There's the argument that says if Obama did come out on the side of the opposition then it would give the fucks in power in Iran propaganda. They could say the opposition are puppets of the west etc.
The host of this show seems a tad dumb.
doubleplusunhappy 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
ali khamenei and ahmadinejad will soon be licking dogs asses in hell
ali khamenei and ahmadinejad should go out tomorrow and face the people. they wont, they are total cowards and would rather slaughter their countrymen than to give up their power and greed
maha77 2 years ago
Who is this Kudlow fellow, and why is he yelling at us?
gummybrain 2 years ago
That's funny. Kudlow is an old kooch who sounds like Phil Hartmann on SNL. Kudlow is annoying as hell and Hitchens is now questioning why he voted for Obama. And I am Hitchens biggest fan. The Rapture is coming my friends. visit my channel.
eqsmooth 2 years ago
This is a problem Iran has to figure out on their own. It doesn't really mattera whole lot if Obama picks a side or not.
Char99 2 years ago 3
It seems like many of my fellow Americans are very stupid and ignorant of history. Iran had a democratic government once-- it overthrew the Shah, but then tried to nationalize Iran's oil resources. So the CIA, under Pres. Eisenhower went in and toppled the popularly elected Prime Minister Mohammand Mossadegh. We put the Shah back on the throne. It was a direct line from that act to the seizure of power by the Mullahs-- who incidentally had opposed Mossadegh for not imposing Sharia law. So STFU.
crazymandan59 2 years ago
Obama is showing a very disturbing trend: he consistently sides with dictatorships and enemies of the USA, while marginalizing and mistreating the allies of America and those who share our values and ideals, such as these young Iranians thriving to live free in a representative democracy, where they can live in prosperity, modernity and be empowered and lived with dignity and honor, not like peons in some backwards and barbaric theocratic dictatorship. Shame on Obama and his hysteric supporters!
USA4July1776 2 years ago
Obama hasn't taken any side on this situation.
Char99 2 years ago 3
your a nut
maha77 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You idiots know nothing about the Iranian political arena. Obama's approach toward Iran is the most intelligent one.
alephba61 2 years ago
God forbid a leftist would side with personal freedom and individual liberty or the fight for democracy, self-determination and personal empowerment and emancipation from ANY government... the left believes that the individual finds freedom through government help... the right believes that it is government itself that, as a system, is wired to control every aspect of people's lives, treating us like children... a soft or a hard tyranny.
The left systematically sides with wrong, failed or evil.
3rdworldinvasion2 2 years ago 6
This has been flagged as spam show
Which makes it all the more starnge that you say you "love" Hitchens. Hitchens is pro-universal healthcare, pro-immigration, pro-government environmental regulation concerning global warming, pro-drug decriminalization, anti-religious right, a critic of Reagan, and so on...
Perhaps you should read a bit more about Hitchens before gleefully declaring your "love" for someone that counters so many of your views.
StuffWriter 2 years ago
We can't let the fact that the Iranian election occurs in a non-democratic theocratic Islamic dictatorship elude us. Blaming Jews, the CIA or whatever other half-cooked, self-serving and a bit too convenient conspiracy theory for comfort won't change the inescapable fact that this Iranian generation wants modernity, individual freedom and personal liberty all the while keeping Islam and Persia as beautiful vestiges of their great civilization, a bit like Japan has been able to do with success.
ObamaUsonofabitch 2 years ago
Now I know why I don't watch Cable news. Kudlow is a twit with his bating questions and Hitchens isn't biting. I don't always agree with Hitchens, but he's smart and dignified.
sbl1952 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
White Man's Burden
hegemony rules!
rodeo179 2 years ago
As much as I support the prospect of democracy in Iran, I disagree with the proposition that Obama should try to get involved because it would be too easy for the Iranian government to use for propaganda purposes. He should do what George Bush the first did when the Iron Curtain fell... just sit back and let history take it's course.
bfq3000 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The hypocrite hitchens again... isn't this the same writer of the column titled "Haha to the Pacifists" - where he ridiculed the anti-Bush and anti-war protesters .. apparently, it's ok to protest if it is against the official enemy.. raising a mirror to ourselves is uncivilized.
fame and fortune to those who write against the official enemies
rodeo179 2 years ago
hows that hypocritical? its consistent: he opposes all tyrannical regimes, and we should do everything in our power to overthrow them.
JeffBeck13 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Christopher Hitchens, concern troll.
hitchwatch 2 years ago
Meh, he isnt all that bad, he is very pro-first amendment and is against the religious right. I just wish he would wake up to a sane foreign policy.
chevydriver1123 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
No, he acts as an apologist for the religious right.
hitchwatch 2 years ago
I've never seen this newsreader before. Is his personal volume knob always turned to eleven?
fishnchimps 2 years ago
the casualties are for sure over 35, I have a friend whose nephew just got out of the jail, and they are saying its over 50 as of yesterday
LeGioNoFZioN 2 years ago
Obama doing nothing is probably one of his better moves but of course the Neoconservatives cant have that.
chevydriver1123 2 years ago
You gotta be kidding
richter75 2 years ago
Obama doing nothing on the surface...but CIA is always involved.. it's a well known fact around the world....
rodeo179 2 years ago
Kudrow is a fucking partisan hack. He doesn't give two shits about the Iranians.
kclymer1 2 years ago
I bet you give a shit about the Iranian theocracy and jack shit about its ppl.
richter75 2 years ago
Who made this Bush cheerleader, Brit turned Yank, an Iran expert??? Corruption prevails everywhere, be it Florida, Ohio, or Iran . . .
AbuCihan 2 years ago
Did someone really say they like Peter Hitchens better than Christopher? That is like saying "Switch this Lennon/McCartney song off and flip to R
qwertyuiop84913 2 years ago
Spot-on analogy, qwerty.
Could anyone who saw thier debate have failed to notice how Peter was not only severely outmatched, but quite visibly and audibly aware of it?
polymath7 2 years ago
Yes. And of course the "R" is supposed to be Ringo, as I am sure you realized.
qwertyuiop84913 2 years ago
Reminds me of a Family Guy episode : (cockney accent) "Look everybody, Ringo wrote a song! That's veeery, veeery good, Ringo! Let's put this up on the refrigerator!"
polymath7 2 years ago
More like Harrison actually. Nonetheless, it is clear that Chris is the more extraordinary of the two.
lollygager3664 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Oh, he's extraordinary alright.
hitchwatch 2 years ago
You again?
How's it hangin'?
lollygager3664 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"You again?"
Get back to me when you grow up, Junior.
hitchwatch 2 years ago
Huck yuck.
Right back at ya, sonny.
lollygager3664 2 years ago
Kudlow's a fuckin retard, Christopher Hitchens is the man however.
JohnnyH1982 2 years ago
I wonder if Obama's support of the Iranian gov't isn't an attempt at reverse psychology. Even if it's not, it'll still probably have that effect.
SabreKitteh 2 years ago
cia funds these protest
sjfmeyers67 2 years ago
Fact check: Obama did call it "iranian Regime"
pouyanb 2 years ago
what if in the 2000 election china or some other country came over here and said that gore will b the president of the US i hate bush but would that b ok? we should stay out of peoples shit the iranian people will over thow him if they want 2
311bmurr 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Iranian election occurs in a non democratic theocracy. We need all the help we can get.
pouyanb 2 years ago
I agree.
truthfreedom4all 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The BBC have been caught faking pics of Iranian protesters once again. So who really knows what's propaganda and what's legit anymore? Shame but true.
Of the Hitchens brothers though, I more likely to be interested in what Peter has to say.
Jatomuzica 2 years ago
The careless and distorted emphasis on ethnic voting cited by writers from the Financial Times and New York Times to justify calling Ahmadinejad s victory a stolen vote is matched by the medias willful and deliberate refusal to acknowledge a rigorous nationwide public opinion poll conducted by two US experts just three weeks before the vote, which showed Ahmadinejad leading by a more than 2 to 1 margin even larger than his electoral victory on June 12.
bulldogger 2 years ago
This poll revealed that among ethnic Azeris, Ahmadinejad was favored by a 2 to 1 margin over Mousavi, demonstrating how class interests represented by one candidate can overcome the ethnic identity of the other candidate (Washington Post June 15, 2009).
bulldogger 2 years ago
you may well be right.. but isn't it a good thing for ahmadenijad to be overthrown?
cricketlover1117 2 years ago
I wouldn't want to be governed by him, but that isn't the point, the point is the propaganda and corporate media are running wild but they don't provide any real EVIDENCE the election was stolen, and while the Obama administration says it doesn't want to meddle in Iranian affairs, they are hard at work try to destabilize the country, it's hypocrisy.
bulldogger 2 years ago 2
would it be wise for obama to say that he wants to destabilize the country? honesty is not always the best policy in global politics.
cricketlover1117 2 years ago