3.15.02 @ 12:03AM
What could Christopher Hitchens possibly claim against Winston? That he was a drinker? So is Hitch, and an exuberant one.
Caution: The following article contains the terms
"Jewish Nigger" and "greasy Jew" as quoted from the writings of the
late Karl Marx. Non-Marxists could be distressed by proceeding
further.
I am told by reliable sources that this month's issue of "The
Atlantic" has attacked Winston Churchill in a major piece by
Christopher Hitchens. That figures. Just a few issues back Michael
Kelly's magazine attacked another of my favorite persons, me. That
is the thanks I get for defending Kelly when his former boss at the
"New Republic" dumped him.
In "The Atlantic," sixteen thousand or so words were excreted
upon
me, almost none of them accurate and many of them refuted. One
refuted charge that leaps to mind is the claim that "The American
Spectator's" Arkansas Project (incidentally, a joke term around the
magazine before the humorless Clinton lovers transformed it into
atrocity comparable in their fevered minds to McCarthyism or maybe
The Holocaust) published nothing of much heft about the
Clintons.
"The Atlantic's" reporter had been told otherwise on the night
he fished around for incriminating evidence against me at a
memorial to Barbara Olson at her home a few nights after she died
heroically in the American Airlines flight that was hijacked and
slammed into the Pentagon. The intrepid reporter apparently thought
this would be the ideal time for an investigative scoop, and so he
waded through the mourners and asked Kenneth Starr to introduce him
to Jean Lewis, a famed RTC investigator who blew the whistle on
Whitewater. Then he surprised the grieving Lewis with "how did the
'Spectator' handle" the Arkansas-related issues? Replied Lewis
"Tyrrell got the Clintons dead to rights." Now that did not make it
into "The Atlantic." Nor has Lewis's letter protesting the
reporter's dereliction. Perhaps the reporter, Byron York, is
bidding to join the company of Doris Kearns Goodwin, Stephen
Ambrose and the journalistic hoaxers. They steal peoples' words and
make things up. He ignores peoples' words and leaves things out. He
certainly left out any word that while working for "The American
Spectator" he wrote plenty of anti-Clinton stuff, for instance, a
report on what a golf cheat the Boy President was.
Thus I would not be surprised that the "The Atlantic" has
besmeared another of my heroes, Winston Churchill (not yet
available at www.theatlantic.com). But what could Hitchens possibly
claim against Winston? That he was a drinker? So is Hitch, and an
exuberant one. That he was a smoker? So is Hitch. God bless him.
That Churchill was a racist or at least thought in racialist terms?
Well, so did most Westerners of his era and not always invidiously.
Yet for a man of the left such as Hitchens to abominate a towering
historical figure for having racial prejudices is either
tendentious or ignorant. After all Winston's racial prejudices were
not nearly so poisonous as those of Hitch's early intellectual
fount, Professor Marx. Karl Marx really hated blacks and his fellow
Jews.
Remember what Marx wrote of Lassalle? He called him "the Jewish
Nigger," and "a greasy Jew disguised under brilliantine and cheap
jewels." And if you missed his drift, he went on to write to
Friedrich Engels, his Ford Foundation, on July 30, 1862, "as the
shape of his head and the growth of his hair indicates, he is
descended from the Negroes who joined in Moses' flight from Egypt
(unless his mother or grandmother on the father's side was crossed
with a nigger).…" Marx goes on like this about many who
incurred his irrational wrath, but let us pass on. Winston
Churchill shared some of the prejudices of his era but none quite
so morbid as this.
Churchill was a very great man. In breadth of achievement from
war to politics to prose and on to simply living life to the
fullest, a gentleman driven by noble virtues and tempestuous
passions -- none that ever hurt anyone save the tyrants and the
bullies. He was one of the great men of history, and were it not
for his courage to go it alone in grim times Hitch might now be
writing in German or perhaps Russian. After all Churchill went on
from the somewhat thankless triumph of beating Hitler to taking on
the next thankless task of sounding the tocsin against Marx's
student, Stalin. Then Winston warned the world against the dangers
of the Atom bomb as it was called in the 1940s.
These virtues and more were brought back to me by a very good
book that is not available in this country but can be purchased on
the Internet, Geoffrey Best's "Churchill:
A Study In Greatness." Buy it, and, by the way, buy "The
Atlantic." I just read Hitch's piece. It is not so bad. In fact it
is quite good, though the cover drawing and headline are idiotic,
but then as I have demonstrated, Kelly seems to admire the
infantile. Perhaps in the months ahead he will be publishing Miss
Kearns, Mr. Ambrose, and those journalists who hoaxed "Slate," the
"New York Times Magazine" and the "New Yorker."
As for my record and that of the so-called Arkansas Project
watch for the next installment of Independent Counsel Robert Ray's
final report. It will verify that I and my colleague Jim Adams "got
the Clintons dead to rights" in publishing years ago that
Whitewater was a land flip and a check kiting scheme. There, the
Clintons' wrongdoing was a misdemeanor. It was their cover-up that,
as with the Lewinsky cover-up, was felonious and a disgrace to the
presidency.
topics:
Russia