Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Thursday, May 04, 2006

Cobban on Hitchens

Helena Cobban is one of our great foreign affairs journalists. She has covered the Middle East, Africa and elsewhere for many years and is herself an accomplished Arabist. Those interested in the Middle East or world affairs who are not reading Just World News daily are depriving themselves of one of the more important sources of insight available on the internet today. She often provides an alternative point of view on Iraq to the one presented at IC, and it is always a delight and honor for me when she posts comments here. She sometimes disagrees with my analysis, and I always respect and take very seriously her highly principled and informed objections-- whether in the end I can agree with them or not.

Helena kindly comes to my defense with regard to the Hitchens theft and publication of my private mail. I know she will not mind if I quote here some snippets of what she wrote:


' I've known Chris Hitchens for, gosh, 35 years now. He was two years ahead of me at Oxford, where we engaged in many of the same political activities. I kept bumping into him over the years that followed . . .

I haven't, however, seen him in person since that point in the late 1990s when he swung inexplicably around the back-side of the political spectrum and changed from being a fairly moderate lefty to being an extremely bitter and pro-war rightist . . .

. . . anyone who's known Chris for even one-fourth as long as I have would have to admit the guy has long had a very serious drinking problem. Was it ad-hominem for Juan to mention that? Yes, probably, although he was doing so in a quasi-exculpatory way-- and Juan, like many of the rest of us, has had solid evidence of Chris's performance of professional duties having been impaired by his evident drunkenness...

The theft issue has to do with something Chris quoted directly in the article there, which was a private contribution Juan had made to a private listserv called Gulf 2000. Juan and I are both members of the, fairly large, membership of this group. Chris Hitchens is not . . .

For many list members, the promise of discretion for what they write is a completely necessary element of their personal security against the intrusions (and worse) of authoritarian state bodies.

So Chris Hitchens had just-- by some unknown means-- gotten hold of something Juan wrote for the list ten days or so ago, and published it there in his Slate article. By doing that, he (and whoever sent him Juan's contribution there) just blithely violated that requirement for privacy . . .

As for Chris Hitchens, I have been really saddened to watch his degeneration over the years . . .

If Chris Hitchens is not in an AA program, I am sure he needs to get into one. In the meantime, the rest of us should hold him quite accountable for his sleazy actions. Being an alcoholic does not give you a "carte blanche", or indeed any other kind of an excuse, to disregard the rules of human society and decent behavior . . .

So, too, more to the point, does Slate, which has been publishing his ramblings for quite a long time now.


The excerpts don't do justice to the essay.
Read the whole thing. And read Just World News every day.

6 Comments:

At 2:59 AM, Blogger Michael Murry said...

Professor Cole,

Briefly, consider two traditional aphorisms that might help you put to rest the needless waste of your valuable time remarking upon the failed attempts of Christopher Hitchens and Andrew Sullivan to write anything readable.

First: "Never get into a wrestling match with a pig, because you'll just get dirty and the pig loves it."

Second (as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes put it): "Controversy equalizes wise men and fools alike -- and the fools know it."

 
At 4:41 AM, Blogger thedeanpeople said...

Ah yes, the "mystery" that is Hitchens. And Sullivan thrown in (or rather jumped) for good measure.

Do none of the big brains in the blogosphere wonder just what the deal is with the US Euphemedia being marbled with ex-pat Brits peddling (literally, without exception) "inside" information and "brilliant" predictive commentary, all neatly wrapped in addictive yet distracting, heat-over-light prose?

Nothing "has happened" to Hitchens. His purpose has not changed with time nor blood/alcohol level.

If you really need to "explain" him to yourself, just recall that the Church committee found over 400 CIA "assets" in the press 30 years ago. Do you really imagine that number has gone down since then ?!!?

The reality-based community would do well to re-read Mr. Murry's post above.

And stop swinging at pitches in the dirt.

--

 
At 9:21 AM, Blogger Bruce said...

I concur with Michael Murry's advice. We depend on you to bring us source news and intelligent comment, and don't want you distracted. The comments about alcoholism aren't helpful; posting the listserv commment, however, was: it didn't deserve the rude treatment, and Slate should be embarrassed not by the author's personal behavior, but by his rude and specious arguments.

 
At 10:50 AM, Blogger Leonard Koscianski said...

Your job in writing "Informed Comment" is too valuable to allow yourself to be distracted by this Hitchens nonsense.

This (meaning what you write about) isn't about Juan Cole, it's about hundreds of thousands of innocent people dying in Iraq.

Stick to your knitting and let others come to your defense.

 
At 1:29 PM, Blogger haydarg said...

Professor Cole,

I also agree that stooping to the level of Christoper Hitchens gives the war mongers more ammunition against you. They would love to portray you as emotional, unstable, and radical. But this is not about Christoper Hitchens. It is about a very dangerous war plan that needs to be opposed at all costs.

Whether Iran is actually pursuing nuclear weapons, I do not, and obviously all the experts in the CIA and State Department, also do not know. But the idea that a nuclear armed Iran is going to nuke Israel is a dangerous fantasy. These are, after all, Weapons of Mass Destruction we are talking about. They would be effectively nuking the Palestinians as well, with major fallout extending into neighboring Muslim countries. This would not be a viable strategy for a country that wants to portray itself as a defender of Palestinian and Muslim rights. Iran itself could experience a significant increase in radiation.

Also, Jerusalem is the third holiest city in Islam. I can't imagine that the Iranians want to turn it into another Chernobyl.

 
At 10:46 PM, Blogger cermak_rd said...

Some of the more humorous columns by Hitch are the following:

The Literal Left Dec 4 2003

Restating the Case for War Nov 5, 2003

Machiavelli in Mesopotamia Nov 7, 2002

Weapons and Terror May 20, 2003

Giving Peace a Chance April 9, 2003

Having refreshed my memory on what he was writing back then I must say that Cole was the one with the better eyes.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home