Excellent post, slasher.

I have made a related point elsewhere on this forum:

Hitchens' fatuous preoccupation with the pointless religion debate, and his obsession with the insignificant Galloway, indicate that Hitchens himself feels - as many others already know - that he has nothing of value to say regarding the current situation in Iraq.

The juvenile that he is (sixth-form boy, debating society, 'I'm cleverer than you!'), he simply keeps irrelevantly bleating, 'I was right!'

Also, 'I beat Galloway in debate, he didn't beat me!' His juvenile sense of competition also explains why he clings to the hope that Galloway's numerous powerful enemies will succeed in making the mud stick in their smearing campaign. What one insignificant British MP may or may not have done is completely irrelevant to the substantive issue - What should be done about Iraq now - on which Hitchens is silent because it is his juvenile ego that determines his debating priorities, not overriding despair and concern for Iraqis' future.

Hitchens is so pathetic that he actually boasts that Galloway refuses ever to debate him again. It seems not to occur to Hitchens that Galloway's reason might be to do with time far better spent otherwise, or that Hitchens is a nauseating presence to be in. Hitchens actually seems to nurture the self-flattering notion that Galloway would dread/fear another bout.