Christopher Hitchens has cancer

[Sophus]

It's unfortunate to see that his relationship with his brother is probably not getting any better while Peter is writing things like this.

[jduster]

It's going to be sad to have to say goodbye to my favorite atheist hawk.

[Thumpalumpacus]

It's unfortunate to see that his relationship with his brother is probably not getting any better while Peter is writing things like this.

No True Scotsman spotted here, amongst many other snags:

Then there is Mr 'Crosland', who (as so often) spoils an otherwise cogent case by dogmatism and hostility. He alleges that believers are pleased by my brother's grave illness. As a generalisation, this is a shameful falsehood, as Mr 'Crosland' well knows. No serious Christian could understand his faith and take such a view - and very large numbers of Christians have publicly declared that they are praying for him, and urged others to do so.

By the way, what article is Peter responding to?

[princepatel]

That's not the same as lowering yourself to rejoicing over someone being unfortunate enough to possibly have cancer. The person is alive and cancer was not asked for.

[Recusant]

Then there is Mr 'Crosland', who (as so often) spoils an otherwise cogent case by dogmatism and hostility. He alleges that believers are pleased by my brother's grave illness. As a generalisation, this is a shameful falsehood, as Mr 'Crosland' well knows. No serious Christian could understand his faith and take such a view - and very large numbers of Christians have publicly declared that they are praying for him, and urged others to do so.

By the way, what article is Peter responding to?

I just saw this.  "Wesley Crosland" is a frequent commenter on Peter Hitchens's Mail Online blog.  You can find the comment from which this quote was taken here, time-stamped "02 November 2010 at 09:58 PM."

Though I'm fairly familiar with the Daily Mail (one of my friends gets the Sunday edition regularly), I have a generally low opinion of it's content and editorial stance, and don't read Peter Hitchens's blog.  This question intrigued me, however, and I did a bit of detective work.

[Sophus]

Then there is Mr 'Crosland', who (as so often) spoils an otherwise cogent case by dogmatism and hostility. He alleges that believers are pleased by my brother's grave illness. As a generalisation, this is a shameful falsehood, as Mr 'Crosland' well knows. No serious Christian could understand his faith and take such a view - and very large numbers of Christians have publicly declared that they are praying for him, and urged others to do so.

By the way, what article is Peter responding to?

I just saw this.  "Wesley Crosland" is a frequent commenter on Peter Hitchens's Mail Online blog.  You can find the comment from which this quote was taken here, time-stamped "02 November 2010 at 09:58 PM."

Though I'm fairly familiar with the Daily Mail (one of my friends gets the Sunday edition regularly), I have a generally low opinion of it's content and editorial stance, and don't read Peter Hitchens's blog.  This question intrigued me, however, and I did a bit of detective work.

Isn't the Daily Mail tabloid journalism?

[Recusant]

Isn't the Daily Mail tabloid journalism?

Now there is a good question.

[karadan]

My mother reads the daily mail (I never capitalise those two words out of principle) which annoys me greatly. It is by far the most irresponsible paper in the UK. It is the pinnacle of knee-jerk hysterical journalism and is to real news what anthrax is to food.

I could go on for hours pointing out the unbelievably hypocritical and morally bankrupt aspects of this particular tabloid but I fear it will make me angry for the rest of the day.

So I'll just leave it at this: The daily mail is the Fox News of the news paper world only, it makes people like Glenn Beck look like a moderate, forthright and sane individual.

[Sophus]

Is that why they're about the only ones reporting that Christopher Hitchens is bisexual? Do they intend for that to be some sort of a smear?

Oh, apparently Gawker is doing the same but I'm not very familiar with them either.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I just saw this.  "Wesley Crosland" is a frequent commenter on Peter Hitchens's Mail Online blog.  You can find the comment from which this quote was taken here, time-stamped "02 November 2010 at 09:58 PM."

Though I'm fairly familiar with the Daily Mail (one of my friends gets the Sunday edition regularly), I have a generally low opinion of it's content and editorial stance, and don't read Peter Hitchens's blog.  This question intrigued me, however, and I did a bit of detective work.

Thanks much, it's very appreciated.

eta:  This is fucking priceless:

Not so long ago, a member of the faithful celebrated Christopher's wholly natural illness thus: "Yay, he's got throat cancer, and it's no surprise that he has it in exactly the place where he has blasphemed so much". Apart from pointing out the embarrassing semi-literate style of many of the simple-minded faithful, Hitchens also mentioned that, in fact, his tumour was not located in his throat, and that he had blasphemed with more organs than that anyway.