At the start of January, I caught PZ Myers in a blatant lie about the stated views of the late Christopher Hitchens. In short, he accused Christopher Hitchens of ‘proposing genocide’ and being in favour of ‘wholesale execution of the population of the Moslem world’’. What was particularly useful about Myers’ claims was the fact that he named the time, place and precise moment Hitchens was alleged to have expressed these views. Unfortunately for Myers, this precise moment in time was also documented on video for all to see. The footage conclusively reveals that Hitchens neither said, implied or hinted at any such thing. Not to mention such views are antithesis to the solidarity Hitchens so vocally expressed for Muslim dissidents throughout his career.

Given PZ Myers was so spectacularly exposed for his dishonesty, I wondered how he would respond. First came another lie wrapped in a denial:

Rather predictably, Myers has now chosen to respond to my writing with even more lies in a new blog post. Given there is zero wriggle room to justify his accusations of ‘proposing genocide’, he has no choice but to construct a straw man to take aim at instead. Myers would have you believe that the criticism levelled at him is comprised of people denying that Hitchens was in favour of war or military action. Myers writes:

‘So we now have an atheism that cheerfully denies reality to declare that Christopher Hitchens was practically a pacifist, because it’s so important to defeat Islam’.

Odd given that I wrote this in the very article Myers is responding to:

‘Call Hitchens’s comments hawkish, call them wrongheaded, call them whatever you like. But just don’t try to claim he was ‘proposing genocide’ or advocating ‘wholesale execution of the population of the Moslem world’.

‘Hawkish’ – Advocating an aggressive or warlike policy, especially in foreign affairs: the administration’s hawkish stance.

So, let me spell it out once again. I’m not denying that Hitchens was in favour of military intervention, right or wrong with all its potential consequences – I am denying that he ever proposed the ‘genocide’ of Muslims. I am denying that he ever advocated ‘wholesale execution of the population of the Moslem world’. I am denying these things because Hitchens never said or advocated them. They are lies conjured by a proven liar.

Myers avoids this fact in favour of attacking straw men because he knows he can’t possibly justify his claims. It’s particularly laughable to claim atheists are whitewashing Hitchens’ support of military intervention when the Iraq War is one of the main points of contention atheists (and Hitchens’ friends) have with the man.

In another embarrassing display, Myers recommends reading the works of Richard Seymour for ‘lots of direct quotes’ of Christopher Hitchens presumably saying some awful things. Coincidentally, earlier this month I reported that Richard Seymour attributed the following quote to Christopher Hitchens in his dreadful book ‘Unhitched’:

“As for that benighted country [Iran], I wouldn’t shed a tear if it was wiped off the face of this earth.”

The source for this quote? Someone told Richard Seymour that they had heard some other people say that they had heard Christopher Hitchens say it once. It seems Myers’ understanding of the word ‘direct’ is about as competent as his understanding the word ‘genocide’.

Continuing the trend of smearing people who expose his lies, PZ Myers brands me a ‘dishonest apologist’:

If anyone can locate a more encompassing example of projection, please let me know.

Stephen Knight is host of The #GSPodcast. You can listen to The Godless Spellchecker Podcast here, and support it by becoming a patron here.

Like this: Like Loading...