Christopher Hitchens Interviewed By Kim Hill

[@ernietarling5829]

Living in Nz as I do, this was the first time I had heard Hitch speak. I just had to learn more about him, as he was the most impressive speaker that I had ever heard. He clarified many things in my mind, especially around religion.

[@howardroark3670]

Listen to as many of his interviews as you have time for. Time well spent.

[@918HUMAN]

thats great 👍

[@1984isnotamanual]

He will about Iraq too. So many of the lies and slanders have now been written as the history and is believed by people as true. Read Hitch on iraq

[@mu9284]

Just gets to show how important is it to have a witty , intelligent and knowledgable interviewer for the conversation to be an amazing one.

[@IC82Hillford]

Miss. Him.

[@free9200]

I miss him terribly.

[@JoeyDavies777]

You didn’t even know him and he’s in the lowest part of hell

[@free9200]

@@JoeyDavies777 alright, good one

[@daleneparole1502]

@@JoeyDavies777, if only It existed...

[@fozzz-vb5oj]

Amazing Interview To Ask the Questions To Answer Them So Honestly 💞

[@SunderMecha]

The part about missing his mom's last phone call to him. I'd never known that. So tragic.

[@martinevans1427]

So sorry that I missed this. Kim Hill is the only person in NZ who could have brought out the best in Hitch. So good.

[@DexterMorris88]

She sounded like she softened and warmed up towards him after a rather cold opening. I quite liked that

[@richiejohnson]

Clicked b/c soulful, wonderful photo of the Master

[@2fast2block]

The Masterbator to his god of nothing that somehow did miracles naturally with nothing as proof it could then orgasmed it did anyway. A master dumbass.

[@richiejohnson]

@@2fast2block two punches to your nuts with your pneumatic punching gun. I think your fascination with Masterbation [sic] is a bit of [sic] projection. Also incomprehensible gibberish.

[@BlinJe]

@@richiejohnson As much as I'm your ally, Stedler.. I don't think he'd have liked to be called the master haha.

[@richiejohnson]

@@BlinJe It's the only way that I could ever possibly have one up on Hitchens. There are incontrovertible advantages to remaining alive. Temporarily, I can have the last word

[@coreycox2345]

@@2fast2block I have no clue what you just said.

[@jestermoon]

Take A Moment Thank you for posting, I have not seen this production. 2:26 ❤missed yet never forgotten. Beautiful mind. 3:28 Stay Safe and Stay Free 🌐 No god's seen or heard in my foxhole for 40yrs. I am a veteran of the RAF for 28yrs. PTSD has an upside, who knew? 4:57 Trump and Biden are lucky Hitchens is dead. We all die, don't you know? 6:49 And a yewish atheist living in Calgary Alberta Untruedaux Land Christopher would be delighted to comment as only he can ❤ 8:45 😂 8:50 😂😂 8:56

[@tylerlately]

This is one of his best interviews and Kim hill is a fantastic interviewer. 34:49 the way she says "the rules" is hilarious. 38:06

[@light1908]

Wonderful find!!

[@bosco008]

Best Hitch interview of all, imo.

[@Judye-t3u]

To listen to him is to fall in love with him all over again. It never fails.

[@LNTunes1010]

I can't think of any other thinker, speaker, as eloquently dominant in discussing the human idea than Mr. Hitchens. [All the greats are included in this statement]

[@PaulOReilly712]

Put him beside Jesus! and see who spoke the truth Honestly :D 6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. 7 If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”

[@lepidoptera9337]

@@PaulOReilly712 If you put him beside Jesus in a debate, Jesus would lose in three seconds flat. ;-)

[@jimmyh6601]

​@@lepidoptera9337 Jesus would give up on Christianity 😊

[@lepidoptera9337]

@@jimmyh6601 Jesus didn't invent Christianity, to begin with. Paul did. Of course, Paul was a conman...

[@martinevans1427]

Who could be got to interview Kim Hill? I would pay to hear that.

[@falangenglishdictionarybys3653]

Intellectual-gladiator

[@2fast2block]

A dumbass wanker to his god of nothing that can do nothing.

[@2fast2block]

@Stig Kolner no, he's a dingbat and so are you to defend that clown. Hitch who pretends to know the bible as he screws up on it over and over again including what faith means biblically. --"Faith is the surrender of the mind, it's the surrender of reason, it's the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other animals. It's our need to believe and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. ... Out of all the virtues, all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated”-- Christopher Hitchens Now, look at what biblical faith really means that Hitch the dumbass didn't even look at: Biblically, faith means trust. It's a trust by evidence seen. God asks that we prove things. To reason. To get knowledge. To study. God has nothing to hide. We develop trust from what is seen, and that which is not seen yet is trusted also because of the trust built up from what is seen. It's much like a human relationship. We don't trust much until a person has gained that trust from what is observed. The difference is though, God is not limited to human powers. He created us. Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. crossexamined.org/biblical-faith-vs-blind-faith/ www.truthortradition.com/articles/what-does-the-bible-say-about-faith www.revisedenglishversion.com/Appendix/16/Faith_is_Trust www.truthortradition.com/articles/faith-a-confident-expectation-of-gods-promises-coming-to-pass www.truthortradition.com/articles/hebrews-1-11-and-faith Hitchens always went into evasive word farting to avoid key questions like how we got the creation of the universe. Real science says nothing does nothing. Real science says if there was something there already it must fit with the evidence of what we know. We know the 1LT says there's a conservation of energy. It can change forms and neither can be created or destroyed. Creation cannot happen by natural means. The 2LT has various aspects, one being the universe is winding down, entropy. Usable energy is becoming less usable, so at one point usable energy was at its max. This all points to a supernatural creation, by a supernatural creator at a certain point in which matter, space and time were created. When I read how it can happen otherwise, ALL the fools resort to science-fiction. Once a supernatural creation is accepted, then the next step is finding proof of what supernatural power did it. We can't even get science without God. The laws of nature only can come from a Lawgiver, God. Only fools follow Hitchens.

[@georgethomas4419]

It's good to listen to people like these very intelligent men and women even when you're not going to agree with everything they say it's important to listen anyways just like we should read and listen to all we can like Dawkins and hitchings and religious text too then you can make up your own mind

[@samsaluni]

kool discussion.

[@geraldjensen9399]

Kim Hill has skill

[@janhall1641]

I SO agree with perception of Khalil Gibran.

[@svendtang5432]

Yeah but boy I think he would fight for not being wrong I would love to hear his analysis today

[@geraldbrienza4474]

Supporting Dubya and the Iraq war was a mistake; his “justification” rings sadly hollow. That said, I think he was a marvelous man in so many ways and I credit him with expanding my atheism into anti-theism. “Hichslap” should be added to the lexicon.

[@davidfoxall3344]

I think whether you agree with him or not, I think his view on Iraq is remarkably consistent with his hatred for dictators. He had solidarity with the Kurds, and he was right that the left abandoned its belief in international human rights over handwringing towards foreign wars.

[@hans-joachimbierwirth4727]

@@davidfoxall3344 No, it is not. Supporting the islamic monarchies against their panarabic rivals (Iraq, Syria) does support the worst arabic dictatorships.

[@Longtack55]

Two of my favourite people him n her. 1941 Iran was invaded and occupied by Russia and the Allies in spite of its declared neutrality. 1953 The popular head of state nationalized the petroleum industry and oil reserves then was deposed in an Anglo-American led coup d'état. Shah Pahlavi installed. 1979 After two decades of growing disenchantment with rampant corruption, unemployment and a brutal police-state, the Iran Revolution was born with an also oppressive religious theocracy, fortunately relaxed to some degree. Don't be fooled by middle and upper-class Iranians in western fashion and mannerisms. The Pahlavis were nasty thugs. 1980 onwards - Western lust for (cheap) Iranian oil has attempted to stuff Iran. Travelers report that the Iranian people are among the most hospitable in the world. At least their leaders are elected now and they aren't pillaged by foreign oil coys.

[@It.wasnt_me]

The sexual tension is palpable 😂

[@SaintP88]

Who’s the woman interviewing him?

[@HaYouDontSay]

Kim Hill. A British born broadcaster who lives and works in New Zealand. She has been on radio and TV in New Zealand for decades. She currently works for New Zealand's public broadcaster 'Radio New Zealand (RNZ)'. She is feared, loved, and respected for being intelligent, well-read, and calling out bullshit (especially politicians on both sides) from her interviewees.

[@SaintP88]

HaYouDontSay Thank you.

[@ConservativeBiscuit]

An interrupting ecotist

[@jordankingnz]

@@ConservativeBiscuit a national treasure

[@geraldjensen9399]

@@ConservativeBiscuit she keeps it moving and interesting, eliciting and extracting information.

[@Balin93]

11:35 LMAO

[@georgethomas4419]

🙏 God bless him 🙏

[@lepidoptera9337]

Which god? We invented so many of them. ;-)

[@fozzz-vb5oj]

Tried to give you BOTH a Thumbs Up And a Thumbs Down ✌️

[@spikedaniels1528]

I need to catch myself on veering into Hitch worship. Although I agree with so very much of his commentary and viewpoint, the fact is that Hitch made a couple just plain bad calls. We must be vigilant to not fall into

[@ShahidIslam-te6fx]

I am surprised he couldnt see the contradiction in his leftist position and supporting a really wrong war

[@gnagyusa]

I admire Hitchens, I'm a fellow atheist too. But, boy was he wrong about Iraq being "better off" now...

[@jaredbraden5480]

should we have left Saddam in power. Shows how little you know about saddam's Iraq

[@FirstLast-le6io]

Yeah, we should have let Iraq descend into an actual hell, like Syria, where the mass murdering fascist can kill 500,000 people without fearing any intervention, how much better that went, fuck off, you care nothing about the victims of fascism.

[@nichoudha]

@@FirstLast-le6io As opposed to Bill Clinton's policy that caused approximately 500,000 dead Iraqis - most of them kids?

[@FergusWalsh-dz7mq]

Spot on about Iraq, place only went to hell under the limp wrist of Obama.

[@comanchio1976]

fergus walsh It was half-way there under Bush. There was woeful under planning for immediate post-invasion.

[@hans-joachimbierwirth4727]

"...the whole country the private property of a fascist..." That is by definition the opposite of fascism, so in the end Hitchens was just another loudmouth not knowing what he was talking about. Hussein's regime was stalinist, not fascist. Fascism was - from its invention on - about the totalitarian rule of a class of patricians, not about a classless mass under one totalitarian despot. The war in Iraq was a war in favor of Saudi Arabia, and that destroys all arguments Hitchens may have ever had once and for all. Rule of thumb: the more often someone uses the term fascism, the less likely he knows what it means.

[@philmitchell91]

It seemed like the Saudis were more than content with keeping Saddam in Iraq as a buffer.

[@magnutz1]

Please expound this idea that Mr Hitchens was "just another loudmouth" because I feel that you are hugely wrong here. You label him a loudmouth baed on his use of the term fascist and that is just silly and incredibly cheap. Please explain what you mean.

[@solitarianihilista1454]

It might be possible to identify a single theoretical "fascism", but that theory took very different forms in those states where it came to power. There are, for example, considerable differences between German National Socialism, Italian Fascismo and Spanish Francoism. The problem with using the term "fascism" is not not so much that people don't know what it means but rather that it can mean many (contradictory) things to different people.They same might be said of Communism, both in theory and practice. As for the the Hussein regime, it might bear some resemblance to certain aspects of both left and right extremist regimes, but it seems to me to have been an essentially military dictatorship rather than any kind of ideological one. Gunbarrel diplomacy is, indeed, one of the few things that Hitler, Stalin and Hussein have in common. Oh, and one other thing. Rule of thumb? Never trust anyone with a 'tache.