Peter Hitchens Interviewed By James Delingpole



Views:4690|Rating:4.56|View Time:1:5:25Minutes|Likes:52|Dislikes:5
My Facebook –
https://www.facebook.com/Patriotic-Populism-121997335317397/

Send In-Stream Donations – https://streamlabs.com/ukippers

FUND MY CHANNEL:
Become A Patron – https://goo.gl/jUq5vL
Donations – https://goo.gl/LwUKre

GAB – https://gab.ai/PatrioticPopulist

JOIN CENTIPEDES – https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/

My Twitter – https://goo.gl/Urzq7Z

Facebook Page – https://goo.gl/mqlBZA

You may also like...

16 Responses

  1. n a says:

    One point. If Peter is saying the drug laws just need to be applied to work then how does he square that with his story that even totalitarian Iran can't prevent alcohol being readily available. That's contradictory.

  2. Æthelstan says:

    START A PODCAST PETER. All you need is a YouTube account and a computer.

  3. Messenger Charles says:

    The Campbell traitor always had Blair by the balls – just like that picture of Vinny Jones grabbing Paul Gascoigne by the balls.

  4. Messenger Charles says:

    Interesting that Hitchens didn't mention the murder of John Smith to make way for the selection of the Blair Bastard.

  5. Messenger Charles says:

    29:50 Hitchens is openly admitting, without actually saying it, that Bolshevism is Judaism.

  6. key buckley says:

    When self-driving cars are realised and all jobs are done by robots will hitchens change his views?Will he start abusing crack? If not his objections are plastic not adamantine

  7. Andy Robertson says:

    Peter you have no right to tell me what drugs I can and cannot take and in what amounts. Your brother was wiser and more humane.

  8. Harry Lagman says:

    Though why we have to listen to them hashing out their minor personal differences I'm not sure..

  9. Harry Lagman says:

    Mr Hitchens' argument just before 12 minutes about breathalyzers is odd, seeing as it's a law relating to alcohol, which is legal!

    The only conceivable point of this argument would be to point out the balance of positive & negative liberties, which has rumbled on for a while.

    In my view, the argument that my liberty should be curtailed because it might affect others is very dodgy. The same argument could be used to stop people using the pavement!

    For the negative liberty argument to apply you need very good reason & evidence, not Hitchens' confident predictions of what would happen (based on what?) Stop people from owning firearms is a possible example (though even this has its problems) or nuclear devices, certainly – they are just too dangerous.

  10. TheFullBug says:

    Who is this Dellingpole chap? Sounds like an utterly unimpressive juvenile. Of course, he’s a ‘libertarian’. It’s become faddish for young lads like these to adopt this ‘libertarian’ label as a fig leaf to conceal the fact that they are actually libertines. This Dellingpole guy sounds like a neurotic, needy, smart-alecky wanker. Peter showed incredible patience in putting up with this dickhead. He also manage to put him in his place.

  11. Toby Maxtone-Smith says:

    Who's that cunt next to Hitchens?

  12. Light_n_Fluffy says:

    Drug laws are very stupid. Where there's a demand, they'll be a supply. Peter should realise that from the things he said about Iran. It's far better to regulate and tax such ‘commodities’. When you take away the risqué, anti-establishment nature of them, eventually far less people will end up using the really dangerous drugs.

    His point about the grammar schools is pretty good though, so long as selection doesn't happen at 11; age 13 or 14 would be better. The standard of education has dropped drastically over the last 40+ years in order to get more people into universities when we really need many of these 'graduates' to become plumbers and brick layers, etc., which is just about the level of most of their intellects.

  13. Rags Toriches says:

    If I was in government I'd be making to moves to get the population hooked on drugs as quickly as possible. The less aware they are about what is happening around them the better. We just few steps away from toppling head long into the abyss and being unconscious on the way down will make the landing more palatable.

  14. David Lea says:

    I like this Delingpole geezer a lot. Peter H was obviously the runt of the family, drones on about drugs that he knows FA all about, and thinks he's intelligent coz he talks with a plum in his gob!

  15. Ironclad says:

    Hitchens may not be an idealist, but I think he's rather out of touch when it comes to the difficulties many people endure with chronic pain and other afflictions. Admittedly the pill popping culture isn't nearly as severe in the UK, but people use alcohol and tobacco in the same way. Many choose marijuana as a lesser evil, and if we want to be pragmatic decriminalizing allows abusers better access to help and provides a safer alternative. If decriminalized and brought under similar regulations as tobacco and alcohol you would not see an explosion in usage, but you would likely see a dramatic decrease in overdoses and accidents associated with the alternatives.

    Also it's one thing to be conservative and not see cannabis as completely benign, and another to insist it's prohibition when much more toxic substances are accessible in pharmacies around the world. This caricature of Western civilization collapsing due to reefer madness is completely removed from reality. I have to question is familiarity with the pharmacology of THC. I would expect someone from a traditional Muslim community imagining the same of the West today because alcohol is consumed freely. Could he even cite one nation so debilitated simply by the free use of cannabis?

  16. MrMorethanexist says:

    East Germany did a deal with Maoists ….Thatcher did a deal with Maoists……Nixon did a deal with Maoists……and we all FALL DOWN.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *