Paul Rhodes's Reviews > god is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

god is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens
Rate this book
Clear rating

's review
May 10, 2009

bookshelves: currently-reading

I am reading this merely so that I soon will be able to tell all those smug more-enlightened-than-thou atheists that I have read it. Christopher Hitchens is a smug, neo-con asshole. Anyone who cheered the Invasion of Iraq really has no credibility whatsoever, and credibility includes, of course, moral credibility. (And, yes, Jeri, you should be ashamed of yourself that you supported the Iraq War. That you still think we were not lied into that war shows that you are braindead.)
1 like · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read god is Not Great.
Sign In »

Comments (showing 1-23 of 23) (23 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Jeri (new)

Jeri Don't hate.

message 2: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes Don't call yourself pro-life.

message 3: by Jeri (new)

Jeri pardon me?

message 4: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes Oh, sorry, I was being excessively charitable. I thought you could read. You say that you are for the sanctity of human life, right? That's why you want abortion outlawed. And yet you support a blatantly unjust war, and do you know what an unjust war is, Jeri. It is murder. A person who says she is pro-life and yet supports murder gives the pro-life cause a very bad name, and I believe in the pro-life cause. So, that's why I don't want a vile person like you who supports neo-con, imperialistic murder calling herself pro-life. Do you understand?

message 5: by Jeri (new)

Jeri You are so filled with hatred and bitterness. That is very much against your pro-life rhetoric. Why would you feel the need to attack me in such a public manner while I haven't had contact with you for months? Were you just bored and thought: I know let me spew my hatred in Jeri's direction? You surround yourself with ugliness (the hate-filled books you read for example)and then unleash it on others who are just minding their own business. I do not recall be less than kind to you but I suppose I must have inflicted some harm on you. That aside, what do you think that we should do now as concerns foreign policy?

message 6: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes Yeah, well venemous rhetoric doesn't kill innocent Iraqi civilians. The so-called collateral damage of the blatantly unjust war that you supported and still support does that. But only in your warped neo-con world of America worship is mere rhetoric hateful and senseless carnage noble. You really disgust me.

message 7: by Jeri (new)

Jeri How could you possibly know what I support? Your utter lack of charity as witnessed by your words shows that you are not pro-life at all. You only try to tear down and destroy proving what a hate-filled world you live in. Your words sound just like all the left-wing bloggers who pollute the atmosphere--huffington post, think progress e.g.. You can only make personal attacks. When the time comes to make a solution to the worlds problems known, no words of wisdom come tumbling from your lips. You can spew hated and call names but that is about all that you can manage. Interesting as you are supposed to be quite brilliant. You seem to think that by making me the villain you lift yourself out of the gutter but it doesn't work that way. If it makes you feel better (you don't seem to be using your rational mind)so we will go with your feelings, I will concede that I am glad that we won the war in Iraq and that they now have a freely elected government. I do not know if they will be able to hold onto it and I mourn the high price paid in both American and Iraqi lives. (Brits, Aussie, etc.)I do love my country, you are very correct in that assessment. I fail to see where there has been senseless carnage. So if you would like to continue this please tell me what you think would have been the proper actions to take over say the last 25-30 years. If you just want to continue insulting and abusing me, go ahead and do that.

message 8: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes Oh, you want my ideas on solutions? Fine. Let's stop supporting Israel. Any country that is, what, the fourth or fifth largest nuclear power in the world does not need our protection or our aid. Let's stop trying to rule the Middle East. Let's withdraw completely from Iraq, and I mean a complete withdrawal, which means no leaving "advisors" or permanent bases in Iraq, as that phony Obama wants to do. And let's stop bombing Pakistan which is destabilizing the country. If we are so worried about Iran, well, then let's also withdraw from Afghanistan and let Iran be so pre-occupied by the mess to their east that they won't have time even to think about attacking us or Israel.

As to what we should have done in the past thirty years, that's really easy. First, we should not have helped Iraq gas the Kurds. Remember, we were arming Iraq to fight Iran all through the 1980s. We gave Saddam the weaponry he used not just on Iran but on the Kurds as well, and we should not have done that. We should not have driven Nicaragua into squalid poverty. We should not have supported the right-wing death squads in El Salvador that massacred Catholic nuns and priests. You know, it amazes me that you call me hateful, when you support a foreign policy notorious for killing priests and nuns. You support a hateful foreign policy, Jeri. In fact, one of your heroes is none other than Margaret Thatcher, who was a Pinochet groupie, and Pinochet would round up monks, torture them, and kill them. One of the few good things that the Reagan administration did was push that authoritarian, bloodthirsty, and thieving dictator out of power.

As to the senseless carnage in Iraq, more than a million Iraqis have been killed, and if you really mourned those deaths, you would be ashamed that you ever supported the unjust invasion of Iraq. It did not bring "freedom" to Iraq. All it did was murder countless innocents, drove thousands of women and girls into prostitution and sex slavery, and pillaged Iraqi resources for the multinationals. Iraq did not attack us, had NOTHING to do with the 9-11 attacks, and was NOT a threat to us. Bush invaded Iraq simply because he wanted to kill and kill and kill. And you supported this hateful, twisted warmonger with a shit-eating grin, and you have the gall to call me hateful.

message 9: by Jeri (new)

Jeri You really have to stop with the name calling. We did not support the death squads in El Sal. We did not use gas on the Kurds although we should have taken out SH during the Gulf War. I think that freedom from communism is a good thing but I see that you don't agree. We did bring freedom to Iraq and please tell me that you don't believe over a million Iraqis have been killed? I do mourn the death of innocents and most often those whose deaths are the results of their own actions. Your hatred has gotten the best of you and you prove that by your last sentences. By the way MT, RR and JPII--love them all.

message 10: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes By the way, Jeri, JPII was opposed to the invasion of Iraq. And, yes, I do believe that a million Iraqis have been killed because of our unjust invasion of their country. That's far more credible than the claim that the invasion of Iraq was just. And, yes, Iraqis have killed Iraqis, but the chaos that gave rise to this slaughter is the result of our unjust invasion and is, therefore, our fault. Freedom from communism is a good thing, yes, but the people of Nicaragua elected Ortega in fair elections, and his government did give the poor much needed relief after years of the Somoza tyranny (which we supported, by the way). But we did not like that, and so we terrorized their country all through the 'Eighties, and what was once a country that was slowly crawling its way out of really squalid poverty became the poorest Latin American country after Haiti. By the way, Ortega is back in power. Should we mine Nicaragua's harbors again until the Nicaraguans become as enlightened as we are? Eh?

I did not say that we gassed the Kurds, but we did give Hussein the mustard gas that he used on the Kurds.

And we did support the right-wing government in El Salvador that killed priests, nuns, Romero, and did indeed employ death squads. You are simply in denial because you are blinded by your idolatry of the U.S.A.

By the way, you do not tell me what to do. I do not obey you, I do not even respect you.

message 11: by Jeri (new)

Jeri That is ok because I don't respect you either. We did not support the death squads. Its seems however that PBuchanan, at least, did not object in Argentina. You could say that we supported the government but you can't say that we sanctioned the death squads. That is unjust and you know it.
I get the impression that you would prefer that we do not get involved in anything that takes place outside of our borders, is that correct?

message 12: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes Well, Pat Buchanan has his fascist tendencies, no doubt. He was the keepers of Nixon's Enemies List. He supported Bush's policies of torture (and, yes, Jeri, those "enhanced interrogation techniques" do indeed constitute torture; I know you disagree, and you disagree because you are blind) and of unwarranted wiretapping. You can take the boy out of the Nixon Administration, but it seems you cannot take the Nixon Administration out of the boy. I voted for Buchanan in 2000 because I could not vote for Gore for obvious reasons and I refused to vote for an obviously mentally retarded man. Buchanan was, of course, right about the Iraq War. For that reason and only that reason I am glad I voted for him. Of course, I agree with him on abortion and gay "marriage". I vehemently disagree with his xenophobic stance on immigration. He predicates this stance on the need to protect the integrity of our Anglo-Saxon Heritage. And I say, "Hey, Pat, you're an Irish Catholic, why the deuce do you care about the integrity of our "Anglo-Saxon Heritage?"

We supported a despised right-wing government in El Salvador against a popular rebellion. Were it not for our support, that rebellion would have prevailed. Therefore, we had leverage with that government. So, if that government used death squads, it did so with our implicit approval. And not only did we implicitly sanction the use of death squads, we trained the thugs in those squads at the School for the Americas. Not only that, we denied and covered up massacres of innocents perpetuated by the Salvadoran Government. For example, the Massacre at El Mozote. Look it up, Jeri, and, maybe, just maybe you will discover that you do not know what you are talking about.

message 13: by Jeri (new)

Jeri I'm sorry what was the obvious reason that you couldn't vote for Gore?
I can't believe that you truly believe that our country and government officials (president, vice-p, etc, etc)are responsible for mass murder. El Mozote was a terrible thing-whether it was one hundred or one thousand it should not have occured. But I can't believe that you believe that Regan or anyone else was complicit in committing mass murder (I know that I repeated myself but I just can't believe it)
Reagan truly believe that communism is evil and that lesser evil would have to be tolerated in order to defeat it-- I don't doubt that. But for you to imply that he or the US govt as a whole supported mass murder is insane.
Is there any great moral evil that is not the blame of Reagan, Bush, or the US?
I am not a fan of communism, socialism or most other ism's myself. Not a big fan of Luther either but it he that must claim my attention as I have a final to prepare for.

message 14: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes It is hardly insane. The American government has not only supported mass murder but has committed it many times. Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and the carpet bombing of Cambodia, to name but a few well-known examples. This only seems insane to a person like you for whom the United States of America is a god.

message 15: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes 1027554 The obvious reason that prevented me from voting for Gore was and is his stance on legalized abortion. I thought you would know this. Apparently I was wrong.

message 16: by Jeri (new)

Jeri Well, since his GPA was the lowest of the candidate's I thought that perhaps it was because, as you put it, he is "mentally retarded." My friend recently had a baby who has Down's and she would be wounded by your callousness. I was going to let it go but then I decided that it was doing you a disservice. Perhaps you should concentrate more on Pope Benedict XVI "Like Mary, you have a part to play in God's plan for salvation, by bringing Christ forth into the world, by bearing witness to him and spreading his message of peace and unity" and stop being so mean. Maybe you don't know the harm that you do but you have the power to wound people and lead them away from God and the Church.

message 17: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes Oh, yeah, calling Bush "mentally retarded" is mean and unholy and wounding and will lead people away from the Church, but murdering and torturing innocent Iraqis is an act of charity, is holy and salubrious, and will have people beating down the doors of Churches to get in (perhaps in the futile hope of escaping America's Shock and Awe, eh?). You really are quite warped. Yeah, well, if I were a mother I would rather be "wounded" by unPC words than shot dead at a checkpoint in Iraq. You support war criminals and their crimes and accuse me of being mean because I am so callous as to call an obviously mentally retarded man mentally retarded. It should be obvious why I do not take you seriously.

message 18: by Jeri (new)

Jeri You are just a mean and cruel man. As far as I know the Church had nothing to do with murdering and torturing innocent Iraqis although I am shocked that you would say that she did.
You are boring me now.

message 19: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes Mean and cruel? I am not the one who supported an unjust war. You are. I am not the one who defends Bush's torture program. You are. And I did not claim that the Church had anything to do with murdering and torturing innocent Iraqis. You apparently cannot read very well.

message 20: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes It's been a year now--over a year, actually--and you have yet to acknowledge that I never claimed the Church had something to do with the murder and torture of innocent Iraqis. You are an intellectually dishonest woman.

message 21: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes You have yet to acknowledge that I never claimed the Church had something to do with the murder and torture of innocent Iraqis. You do not care about the truth at all, do you, you intellectually dishonest woman?

message 22: by Paul (new) - added it

Paul Rhodes And, let me repeat, when Jeri calls herself pro-life, she is lying. She is not pro-life. She is pro-murder. She likes to murder people. That's why she supports American Foreign Policy.

Darren Hitchens makes me furious! I'm an Atheist, and I can't believe that this man is, as you rightly say he is, a right wing neo-con. It's fucking sad mate, truly fucking sad :-(

back to top