Suseonline,
Thank you for that superficial response to my post--which attempted a condensed criticism of Hitchens's political stance in the world, and not merely his criticism of a book I have little time for myself. What you've quoted me as saying should be read in the context of the whole.
This thread is clearly devoted to panegyrics and dissenters are not welcome. Indeed, the liberal rationalists and their followers in general are good at dishing it out but are highly sensitive to criticism.
Indeed they're above it and generally don't deign to reply--at least not reflectively.
Not that I expect Hitchens to reply..

Squeers, thank you for thanking me for being superficial!
A back-handed compliment if ever I saw one.

In any case, your last comment about Christopher Hitchins made me smile... thanks for that :)

Thanks Suseonline for accepting my rebuke so graciously, I felt you gave my post short shrift.
Reviewing the article again it seems to me a shame it hasn't provoked any real engagement. For a start the tone seems more appropriate for a holy relic than human clay; on the other hand, half of it is a plug for atheism rather than a eulogy for Hitchens; atheism too that's apparently a virtue in itself, such that we need not be concerned about it's political or ethical credentials.
There's lots of other interesting material too that might have provoked comment. The twice insisted comment that Hitchens is "forever removed from existence". Apart from rubbing it in so emphatically, even Hitchens implicitly acknowledged that this is an item of faith rather than certain knowledge. Indeed, later David Nichols lauds Hitchens for recognising that "no human concept or reliance on tradition can provide absolute answers". Nor can any provide absolute negations!
Then there's the comment, "A healthy mind [whatever that is] does not wish for its own extinction". The Buddha was afflicted with an unhealthy mind then, since extinction is the goal of Theravada (the doctrine the Buddha taught). Indeed the world is afflicted with a great many unhealthy minds preoccupied with a death wish, even while they cling to life. Thanatos rules and Hitchens's atheism offers no comfort in terms of a "good life" in this world, while obviating the next. And that's the nub of my criticism; I've asked before what the liberal-rationalist atheists stand for in terms of a vision for humanity?
Personally, I've always found the idea of my mortality something of a comfort in such a distressing world and don't fear death at all, only the manner of death. And I do see it as the promise of blessed release. I despise death and have never understood the morbid fetish we make of it, which perhaps explains my lack of respect. What worries me more is I despise life; not life per se, but the life we've commodified and demeaned, which Ditchkins implicitly support.

I think we both know the reason for that, Squeers.

>>Reviewing the article again it seems to me a shame it hasn't provoked any real engagement.<<

The problem with the article is that it makes a fetish of Hitchens' atheism. A mistake that is normally made by Christians, who try to persuade us that atheism is just another facet of religion.

Hitchens didn't take the stance that he did on so many topics "because" he was an atheist. It wasn't the driving force, e.g. "I am an atheist, therefore I must support the war in Iraq", or "I am an atheist, therefore I must expose Henry Kissinger for the showpony charlatan that he is".

He happened not to believe in a Supreme Being. He also adamantly and vociferously opposed the manner in which so many had turned their Supreme Being into a socio-political tool, the better to control and exploit their fellow human beings. But he did so in precisely the same manner that he excoriated anyone who made political capital from mass deceit.

It would be a shame if Hitchens became defined merely by his atheism. It would be doubly shameful if this were to occur through the agency of atheist "organizations".

squeers quote/'""I've asked before what the liberal-rationalist atheists stand for in terms of a vision for humanity?"''

me too
its a shame we wont know
thus need to guess

but if its anti thiest...im all for that
if its anti/theo
im against it

there is..[anti..]a[thiest
or anti..[a]theo

or a/gnistic...who aanti..[a]..gnostic's

or some other such
flawed BELIEF..susstem

to wit miss belief..rather than diss-belief
cause it gives them..mindnumbing relief

""Personally,I've always found the idea
of my mortality something of a comfort""

yep me too

i know this insanity will end
for all of us..regardless of belief..[or thiestic bias]

but not
cause of this world

""in such a distressing world..and don't fear death at all,
only the manner of death.""

all death is dead
regardless of the process

the pains of death are numbed..many die seemingly in peace
drugged to the eye balls..[many sleep away eternity...cause they dont realise they are 'dead']

if dead..they reason
why arnt i dead...lol

circular reasoning
im not dead
so how can i be ';dead'

""And I do see it..as..the promise of blessed release.""
no drugs do that

we 'die'...but not into buddistic nuthingness

thats pure delusion..[energy cant be created nor destroyed]
your life essence [spirit]..lives on
in your new body[your soul]

till you release it
into its eventual..eternal body..of light

""I despise death"'

i embrase it..in its time

""...the morbid fetish..we make of it,
which perhaps explains my lack of respect.""

yeah hitch..*is dead
no kids..where he is...now

""What worries me more..is I despise life;
not life per se,..but the life we've commodified and demeaned,""'

no mate
we must all..pass this way
via one life sentance...to l-earn...!

to what passions..of the new
next/life..same..we give our energy to
as we chose..here/now..[to love]..more of the same..is a given

I see where you are coming from Squeers, but I don't see how one man, such as Christopher Hitchins, can explain his reasons for being an atheist and cause such angst among God-believers?

At the end of the day, all the God-believers will still believe that their God is real and that all the atheists will find this out when they die!

The truth is that no one will ever be able to come back and tell us all the truth though.

I don't class myself as an atheist as such, although I am very much a skeptic who will continue to ask questions and not believe everything I am told just because it has always been that way.

Believing things just on 'faith' is a hard concept for many intelligent people.

I would not presume to tell anyone else what they should and shouldn't believe, but I would also expect to be able to ask questions about those beliefs without being damned to hell for it!