Christopher Hitchens on Charlie Rose 08-May-96 (Part 1)

[@idontgetno]

Breindel is taking a lot of heat like St. Martin's press is taking a lot of heat. I think his point is well taken. A retraction of publication is not necessarily censorship. One also wonders if Breindel weren't so nasally & whiny, might he garner more respect? Is it his opinion or his demeanor?

[@QueenieQue]

Wow, I haven't seen so many speech impediments on a show in a while. Thank goodness for Christopher Hitchens.

[@wickedceltics]

Excellent. Thanks for posting.

[@snowzy79]

I absolutely love any Hitchens video/debates, would love to see anything he ever did before passing

[@LeeTheAgent]

Love the Hitchen's videos BerkelyGuy, please post more Hitch!

[@stoprainingonme]

I'd love to know your sources on that

[@SatchmoSings]

AtheistRevolutionX- Breindel was a heroin addict; that's a matter of public record even though it was NOT mentioned in any of his obits. He was arrested on May 15, 1982 for buying heroin in a Wash, DC park and his arrest sparked a huge investigation of US Gov't employees who used drugs as security risks.

[@1982rf]

@besmb2105 Interesting can I see this information you have found?

[@bobby_bretwalda]

of course we like the hitch videos dude, keep em coming!

[@lictor313]

@sfmike20 what comprehensive list is this? could you provide a link or citation? The Almanachs of the period (which were the most reliable census of jewish populations ) found no such drop in population after the war... in fact in 1953, 8 years after the war, there were more jews in the world then then in 1939 as per woprld almanachs of the period... how is that possible when we take into consideration that 70% of the worlds jews were European... and that these were liquidated wholesale?

[@lepolemicist]

So if Random House or Oxford University Press published Mein Kempf?

[@1982rf]

@besmb2105 So can you put a whole in one of Irvings findings? If so you should tell him as hes offered a cash reward...

[@kenp3L]

Limiting Irving to an "off-off-Broadway publisher" (OOB) in fact limits Irving's ability to sell books. SMP can sell more Irving books than OOB can. What "we can't have SMP lending its moral weight to Irving's books" really means is that "I don't want SMP using its marketing structure to help sell Irvings books because I don't want people to read Irving." Censorship is not necessarily an absolute. If we can reduce Irving's readership by, say, 60%, then we have censored Irving by 60%.

[@1982rf]

@besmb2105 Didnt really understand your last comment. If they have why dont they collect the cash reward?

[@besmb2105]

BTW, it seems you need to read the article all over again. It says hes distorting facts and leave out important evidence. Like I said: Big difference between making opinions on historical facts, and using them to support your own conclusions.

[@besmb2105]

@1982rf Yes, but I didnt finish the sentence. This was supposed to be actual sentence: He might be an intelligent historian, but that doesnt mean hes not lying or twisting facts.

[@tg343441]

This guy is the only one who holds his own when debating Hitchens

[@kenp3L]

@besmb2105 Who is this Dr. Wilhelm Hoett? When and where did he make this statement? Why should his opinion on the issue carry any more weight than the average person's opinion?

[@ScientificalnessUSA]

“All things weird are normal in this whore of cities.” - Eddie Constantine as secret agent 003 Lemmy Caution in Jean-Luc Godard's 1965 film “Alphaville”

[@blackmore4]

"Rosemary's Baby" party scene extra.

[@kenp3L]

"I think Breindel makes a fool out of Hitchens in this case." Would you elaborate on that, please. I watched the same video and arrived at the opposite opinion.

[@ConradZaar]

Hitchens is being extraordinarily obtuse on this question, insisting on bringing up the First Amendment in a situation in which it is completely irrelevant. A publisher is under no constitutional obligation to publish any book it doesn't want to publish. You could accuse this publisher of making a poor business decision, or of failing to recognize a worthy book when it sees one, but all Hitchens's talk about free expression is just posturing.

[@Fukkutah]

I agree with you on Breindel, but on Hitchens .. you see he wasn't arguing the topic, he was only arguing that everyone has a right to express their opinion however unpopular it may be. Now I'm not a huge fan of Hitchens, but I vigorously agree with him on this question of liberty. To throw someone in jail for an historic opinion they hold is a little barbaric.

[@besmb2105]

@1THETRUTH10 The difference here is that youre not critsizing a religion. What ur doing is to deny something so overtly prooven and documented. I honestly do not find it offensive that people deny such a thing, I simply find it frightening. That people believe that something so apparent never happened, despite intense evidence.

[@WalterLiddy]

@Freethinker12341 Clearly not. What he's arguing for is the opportunity to get these issues out in the open and the possibility of deciding about it left up to everyone, not just a few people who then decide if the rest of us get to read about it. However, I don't agree with him. I don't think that any publisher is obliged to print anything they don't want to for any reason they may have at all.

[@kenp3L]

"By the way this was in 1996, 4 years before the Lipstadt libel case. I think Hitchens would look back on this clip and wince." Why is that? Is your point that for one to bring a libel suit is per se evidence of hypocrisy when one claims to crave free speech?

[@besmb2105]

@1THETRUTH10 "most historians do not go for primary sources" thats what is every historian is supposed to do. BTW its not as if David Irving has not been cought red - handed for historical revisionism in the past.

[@sholomhoffman]

Yes you are 100 percent right. Also, I am shocked that people allow the fact that his voice is of a nasal nature to completely dismiss him. I find with Hitchens that he has great at ridiculing and debating with religious nuts, but when it comes to arguing with some one that is highly educated, like Eric Breindel is, Hitchens falls flat. I find it funny how people declare Hitchens the winner based on the opponent's voice.

[@BoozyBeggar]

HItchens: "I don't think I've interrupted you yet." Good to know he was always Hitch.

[@besmb2105]

Therefore I do think publishing history-books bear some standard.

[@croutonfada]

Spot on. Any company can choose to publish or not. I don't fear liars like Irving and he should be allowed his voice. When we try to stifle that voice we only amplify it. Fight the argument with a stronger argument and you stand a better chance of winning.

[@kenp3L]

"[H]e tries to defend Irving through an attempt to create an ethos for a man who is totally deprived on any ethos for the great majority due to his holocaust denial." That's not very well written. Are you saying that one may support the free speech of a controversial figure only if that support is accompanied by criticism of the controversial figure himself? I'm not sure what you mean.

[@besmb2105]

@1982rf Just google HDOT.com. Its on the internet also, that Leuchter was wrong.

[@sholomhoffman]

Eric won since it is not a freedom of speech issue which Hitchens falsely take it to be and which Eric points out to him. Eric is simply arguing that a publishing house, like St. Martins, has a right for whatever reason not to publish a book. AS the debate shows, Hitchens was still able to obtain the books through David Irving since he is not bared from publishing on his own. Love Hitchens, and this debate is one of the few where he was utterly defeated.

[@1982rf]

@besmb2105 Some confessions at Nuremburg were obtained under torture...

[@besmb2105]

Well, book or not, it seems that people have already been on the frontline and refuted hes views. You could just check out HDOT.coms article from Richard J. Evans.

[@bricology]

"more important is the fact that there is a world of difference between debating the minutiae of, say, the Holocaust, and (on the other hand) debating the very fact of the Holocaust." Except that no one has disputed that a huge number of Jews were mistreated, enslaved, murdered. "The very fact of the Holocaust (TM)..." shows that you're wandering off the path of reality into convenient constructs. "The Holocaust" isn't something that occurred, is indisputably described and is carved in stone.

[@JoeThePhilosopher]

History is "revised" all the time. It's called "accruing knowledge." That's what education means.

[@hornetobiker]

That's interesting, thanks for that. As for NFT's comment, I'd like to know too. I don't like censorship either.

[@1982rf]

@besmb2105 Twisting historical facts? No Irving was imprisoned in Austria for "Trivialising the Holocaust". If he is making up his own opinion (something historians and regular people do all the tmie) how come no one has easily made a book putting holes in his opinions? Surely if is so easy to discredit him with evidence why hasnt anyone done so? He has even offered a cash reward if anyone can...

[@toycarlvr]

Christopher...if you can hear me back in 1996...PLEASE STOP SMOKING and watch your DRINKING habits! We need you around for a long time!

[@besmb2105]

@1982rf The same historian has been imprisioned for twisting historical facts, so not entirely. Its a big difference between looking at historical documentation and writings of other historians and making up your own opinion by these , and using facts to support your own conclusion.

[@Studentofgosset]

Yeah, but since when is success a dirty word? Or doesn't America laud that as a virtue anymore? Perhaps when someone else is enjoying it, right?

[@stoprainingonme]

"I haven't interrupted you yet." Why I love Hitchens

[@bricology]

"This is why he now spends his time lecturing to sad gagles of neo-Nazis and Holocaust-deniers, most of whom have probably never read a book in their lives." You mean, I presume, the various departments (often the philosophy departments) of the dozens of colleges and universities all over the world each year that invite Mr. Irving to come and speak? Like the UCC which invited him to speak in 2007, but had to cancel because of political pressure and threats of violence? Never read a book, eh?

[@besmb2105]

@1982rf Like I said: Big difference between making opionions on historical facts, and using them to support your own conclusions. Someone already seems to have refuted hes claims. I just came across a soure which says he took some of the information from the Leuchter-report. Which has already been discredited as a hoax, by professionals, and resulted in Leuchter loosing hes job.

[@besmb2105]

@1982rf . Of course hes probably right about a lot of things, but that doesnt mean hes not portraying facts in hes own way. Hes na historian, and all historians have to support facts and documentation, howewer that doesnt mean hes not portraying history in hes own way and leave out important evidence.And it doesnt mean that hes arguments are fully truthful. Leuchter was fired for freud by hes own working company.

[@grands1am]

@manthasagittarius Totally agree that there is a violent dissonance between the expression and the voice. It's funny that Hitchens mentions not being able to see them, because unless he knows Breindel already, I would have to guess he has a very inaccurate mental image of him here. Even though Breindel apparently has the shakiest voice known to man, a statement like "So we have no problem" at 7:30 at least sounds assured. When you see him, though, it looks utterly desperate.

[@thegafferlives]

What a creepy little fellow.

[@idontgetno]

I would concur. I also note with dismay the tenor of the comments; Breindel was in the latter stages of a terminal illness; just as Hitch soon would be. And people crow with triumph how Hitch whomped Breindel's ass. They demean Breindel. it makes me wonder what era we are in. Jim Crow? The Weimar Republic? Hotel Rwanda? I do believe that tomorrow, the West could slide into apartheid. The only question would be, which ethnic, disabled, or ideological minority would be marginalized?

[@besmb2105]

I understand that its easy to be angry with a Holocaust-denier. But remember, theres a lot of people out there with their own agenda. Hopefully most educated people will never take them seriously. So dont let it ruin your day. I do not think Hitchens is a Holocaust-denier, but he is defending Irvings right(s) to publish hes book(s). I know that he has been outspoken against antisemitic views before, so I wouldnt think so. Atleast I hope not.

[@Mike3303]

Well, he did die in 1998. He apparently used heroin and had AIDS. His body was probably shutting down at this point. He is still very articulate, nonetheless. That, in the least bit, is impressive. But, like most cases, Hitchens stomps all over him.

[@SatchmoSings]

Mike3303-- I don't know whether or not Briendel had AIDS; he was most DEFINETELY a heroin addict, though.

[@besmb2105]

@1982rf Its the same. They prooved him to be a falsifier of history. So they are two parts of the same coin in this case.

[@grands1am]

This Breindel guy is weird. I kind of feel bad because he seems really nervous, but he's totally insane.

[@1982rf]

@besmb2105 On the walls that were demolished and rebuilt by the polish government?!?

[@ssalemi]

The New York Post guy looks like an alien or cyborg to me.

[@besmb2105]

@1982rf What walls are you talking about? No, Im not so sure I do not think everyone has the right to publish history-books, cause you have to follow some sort of historical correctnes. Even under freedom of speech, historians must deal with sources and facts to establish interpretations of history. Therefore I d

[@Meowwithanh]

Man version of hypnotoad =p

[@besmb2105]

@1982rf Ahh, that one confession from Hoess. He also atmitted hes crimes in hes diary. I know other people has found faults in the claims of Irving. Seriously, he might be an intelligent historian, but that,on the other hand does

[@c3066521]

The Post guys fucking creeps me out.

[@JABS991]

wow. Breindel seems almost afraid of debating w/ Hitchens... does he have some sort of disease that I am not aware of?

[@stoprainingonme]

@Freethinker12341 No.

[@pegelatrin]

He had Aids.. probably why he sounds very fragile..

[@JoeThePhilosopher]

@besmb2105 "..the intense documentation put forward by the allies in the nuremberg trials." Huh? The fact is, most of that evidence has been proven to be bogus. Otherwise, tell me what you're talking about. Shrunken heads? Lamshades made of human skin? Pillow cases stuffed with Jewish hair? Soap made from flesh? There was a lot of soap, alright. (Much it written by Ben Hecht, a famous Holylwood screenwriter)

[@ixat00]

@1THETRUTH10 "Also Israel is the most racist country on earth." You have obviously never lived in Russia, sir. The xenophobia and antisemitism in that country is appalling and universal.

[@trexx32]

no just a liar

[@eatnope9543]

omg repressing a fart at 9:41

[@besmb2105]

The fact that theres people who denies that the Holocaust ever took place is just outright horrible. Theres absolutely no excuse. And I definately think antizionist Holocaust-denial is despicable. I know that not all antizionists are, but you and some others seems to be. I think its even more discusting, cause as an anti-racist that you seems to be, you should know better.

[@besmb2105]

@JoeThePhilosopher Whatever you wanna call it, I still your ideas are discusting. Id rather be an idiot than someone who denies something like that.

[@whalefish83]

that eric is a creepy little creature

[@hornetobiker]

Irrelevant comment from an irreverent "man".

[@LovingKimiKatkar]

Who could say NO to Faye Wong? She's a marvel. Preparations were in the works for the incomparable Teresa Teng to perform on Faye's album but thus: the 42-year-old Miss Teng (Deng Lijun) passed away at 5 P.M. on Mon. 5/8/95 in Chiang Mai, Thailand. More's the pity. Her body was returned by military jet to Taipei whereat she was honored w/a State funeral. Her mortal remains are enshrined at Chin Pao San {Golden Treasure Mtn.} Cemetery @ 18 Xishihu, Xihu Village, Jinshan Township, Taipei Co.

[@Lion117]

breindel is like.., bill hicks idea of "Pro-life". lol. Icky. =|

[@lictor313]

@septip123 The Marines liberated Ohrdruf, which was a labor camp with no killing facilities. The only filmed images of liberated camps that we have from Americans are from Ohrdruf, - orhdruf was not even part of the "holocaust"- it was a labor camp - the liberation of these camps and exaggeration of the atrocities committed there was for political purposes, to further justify american participation in the war. The marine would probably be more pissed off about what we did to America since.

[@1982rf]

@besmb2105 So you have gone from saying someone proved him wrong (comment removed) to hes lying; thats a strong argument. O wait its not is it. Heeheheh.

[@Fukkutah]

when you talk about jews or muslims, THEY start watching what YOU say; not to listen, but to figure out which label they will stick on your back.

[@Fukkutah]

I don't entirely agree, try criticizing Israel or AIPAC for anything and you will quickly find out how it is in the USA.

[@Fukkutah]

You are allowed free speech only if you say what we want to hear!

[@JoeThePhilosopher]

@besmb2105 I notice you didn't respond to the article I showed you called "Talmudic Truth." Is this document a lie, a fake, or a forgery? Why don't you address specific points I make instead of calling people names? Your hypocrisy is massive. Your arrogance is pathetic. You should learn to respect the facts, not spout drivel.

[@bricology]

"Irving is not an historian - he is an amateur who never graduated." That's the most idiotic thing I've read in weeks. Do you know who Edward Gibbon was -- one of the greatest historians in English history, author of the history of Rome? His college career consisted of 14 months at Oxford. Needless to say, HE "never graduated" either. A degree or diploma are far less important to a historian than the ability to find primary source materials, organize information and present it in a cogent way.

[@stitcha123]

eric breindel sounds like gill from the simpsons.

[@spacehopperballs]

Is he gonna start crying?

[@bricology]

How little you know! Evans' "expert testimony" was a joke. Have you read any of his summary? Hundreds of pages of laughable ad hominemery. He managed to find a total of 19 errors Irving had made, including misreading a single, handwritten word. And for this, Lipstadt paid Evans £125,000. Funny that the first 4 publishers Evans approached with his book manuscript about the trial were sufficiently unimpressed to turn him down. And his usual publisher wouldn't touch it, for fear it was libelous.

[@Roeszyfloras]

Breindel's argument is just silly.

[@LoafEnd]

Eric Breindel is fucking creepy.