Vanity Fair profiles The eXile: "Gutsy...visceral...serious journalism...abusive, defamatory...poignant...paranoid...and right!"
MSNBC: Mark Ames and Yasha Levine
Broke the Koch Brothers' Takeover of America
eXiled Alert! / February 18, 2009
By Mark Ames

First there was Hitchens’ comically idiotic attempt at gonzo waterboarding, in which the macho British warmonger lasted all of 11 seconds, even after he massively cheated in order to make the waterboarding as unfrightening as possible. Now he’s spinning a recent hilarious ass-kicking he suffered in Beirut as some kind of principled macho neocon bravado. The story circulating has it that Hitchens bravely defaced a Syrian fascist poster, and was summarily stomped along with two other journalists by gangs of Syrian thugs. However, according to a neocon blogger pal of Hitchens who was on the scene, what really happened was more Sylvester The Cat slapstick than Superman bravado:

I wasn’t there. I was there, however, for the immediate after-action report, and have heard it told ten times by now, including most of it from Hitchens.

Hitch and two others were out on some or such errand. One guy was just telling Hitchens that the Syrian Nazi party had little support in the country but was paid by Syria to kill people, and that he’d been told they’re the one party you don’t fuck with.

So five minutes later they come across the poster for the Syrian Nazi Party on an abandoned bagel shop — abandoned, if I had this right, after Hezballah had attacked it last year due to the overly Jewish connotations of bagelry.

So Hitchens immediately takes out a pen and writes “No, no, Fuck You” on the poster.

…Well, when this Syrian Nazi goon saw Hitch do this, he confronted him and kinda-sorta attacked him. I say kinda sorta attacked, because what his main intent was was to delay Hitchens from leaving — until the ten Nazi goons he had just texted on his cell phone could arrive.

There was some kicking and pulling and hitting. Hitch and the others attempted to get into a cab — the Syrian Nazi goon got right in the cab with them, still hitting Hitchens. They could not force him out. Eventually they all exited, and attempted to get a fresh cab, but other cabbies were now hip to the fact the Syrian Nazis had been riled and wanted no business from them, so two cabs passed refusing their fare.

So rather than getting stomped while fighting bravely against a gang of Syrian fascists, we have Hitchens plus two sidekicks deliberately provoking Syrian thugs in a foreign city…and then fleeing like bitches when one lone Syrian nerd came after them. And even with their three crusading Western selves versus one lone Syrian nerd, Hitchens STILL got thrashed. The offended Syrian fascist even followed Hitchens into the back of the taxi and rag-dolled him in the backseat! It’s so Looney Tunes that you have to wonder if the taxi rocked back and forth while the nerd was pounding Hitchens in the back. Like, were there stars shooting out of the taxi windows? Did Hitchens see a tweety bird circling around his head after the stomping?

Even the one impressive detail first reported about the fight via Hitchens’ supporters–that he got stomped in the middle of the night, in a dark empty Beirut backalley, after getting famously drunk in a bar, fighting alone against a gang of Syran fascists–was an inversion of the truth, a very sad slapstick truth. In reality, Hitchens was stomped in broad daylight in a “posh shopping district” by a lone Syrian twerp fighting against Hitchens and two friends after they set him off. As the aforementioned neocon blogger (who thinks he’s doing a favor for his buddy Hitchens) notes:

It didn’t happen in a bar. It happened mid-day on the street. It wasn’t a drunken brawl. I have no idea if Hitchens had drank at all, but if he had, it was like his typical lunch-time bloody mary. (I’m not saying he didn’t get drunk– just not then.)

Thufferin’ thuckutash. Hitchens’ buddies tried to warn him before the stomping that if he defaced a Syrian fascist poster, it would cause problems for everyone . Naturally, Hitchens didn’t listen and instead took a tough moral stand…before fleeing like a bitch and getting his ass kicked, even though with two backups he should have stomped the Syrian. Sorta stands as a metaphor for Hitchens’ behavior during the Bush years.

It reminds me of the episode when Sylvester gets stomped by the kangaroo. Sylvester picks the fight deliberately because he’s sure he can kick the kangaroo’s ass and therefore impress his son, since to Sylvester, the kangaroo is nothing but a mouse. Sylvester’s son tries to tell him that the kangaroo is much more serious than a mouse, but Sylvester patronizingly tells his son not to be afraid, they’re just little mice, because Sylvester sees this as a cheap opportunity to make himself look tough: “Son, you take care of all the little mice, and I’ll handle any BIG mice that come along.” Once again, Chritthhhhhhtopher Hitchenttthhh-thhhh, you showed that big mouse who’s boss.

Mark Ames is the author of Going Postal: Rage, Murder and Rebellion from Reagan’s Workplaces to Clinton’s Columbine. You can reach him at

Click the cover & buy the book!

Read more: , Mark Ames, eXiled Alert!

Got something to say to us? Then send us a letter.

Want us to stick around? Donate to The eXiled.

Twitter twerps can follow us at


Add your own

  • 1. jesus  |  February 18th, 2009 at 11:30 pm

    Jesus! What a pussy. I doubt many Americans could do a lot better, though.

  • 2. Tam  |  February 19th, 2009 at 12:17 am

    Mark, lovely analogy! One of the very few things I like about you is your reverence for the wonder of Loony Tunes cartoons. Viva La Bugs & co!

  • 3. Frank  |  February 19th, 2009 at 1:41 am

    While I love your articles about the economic situation in America (and loved your book Going Postal), I think this article sounds more like a high-school jock making fun of the nerds who get stomped for no reason than of an intelligent adult. I mean, you can attack Hitchens for his ideological instability, and I would wholeheartedly agree with you, but trying to demean the man because he got beaten up in a brawl is just pathetic.

  • 4. Matt  |  February 19th, 2009 at 2:51 am

    Wtf, is the Syrian nazi party? You mean these guys: ?

  • 5. wengler  |  February 19th, 2009 at 3:40 am

    What kind of idiot goes around foreign cities defacing their political signs? I’m not familiar with this pro-Syria party but it is hilarious that they tried to run away from one guy armed with just his fists.

    Neo-cons are all shock and awe right? They can’t deal when they get back just a fraction of their own medicine. I hope Hitch has a piss in his pants look on his face just like Wolfowitz did when he almost got blown up in a donkey cart rocket attack.

  • 6. Mark  |  February 19th, 2009 at 4:07 am

    How pompous and fake for Hitchens to write on that sign. Looks like he was just trying to show off in front of his neocon pals. You’d think someone who has traveled as much as Hitchens would know how dumb that is. Know-it-all foreigner engages in an act of cheap political ‘activism’ then tries to run away…

  • 7. Church of Here and Now  |  February 19th, 2009 at 5:12 am

    Well, you must remember that it’s a miracle ole Hitch’s liver has yet to explode inside him, and that he can even stand upright, and so his poor showing becomes a wee bit more impressive.

  • 8. koerbagh  |  February 19th, 2009 at 5:16 am

    So you don’t like the guy… Fine, but is that a reason for cheap shots at his looks? All too easy. Ridicule anyone, but leave the personal slur out. It’s degrading. (to you, that is.)

  • 9. Ian Gould  |  February 19th, 2009 at 5:18 am

    Gee, Lebanese taxi drivers can telepathically notify each other that the “Syrian Nazis” are coming.

  • 10. Ian Gould  |  February 19th, 2009 at 5:21 am

    Oh and the :”Syrian thug” in question is almost definitely Lebanese.

    Considering the inability of hitchens and his cronies to get basic facts straight, is it any surprise that their glorious Iraq war was such a clusterfuck”

  • 11. Frankly Foolish  |  February 19th, 2009 at 6:45 am

    Frank #3: There is no such thing as bullying a warmonger. Hitchens has made a career of bullying anyone who doesn’t support his disastrous wars. But you’re worried that Ames may have hurt Hitchens’ feelings? What are you, a sick Christian fuck?

  • 12. Matoush  |  February 19th, 2009 at 7:05 am

    Wow, this put a smile on my face. What a dumbfuck….It’s just so perfect. He thought he’d be a tough guy (ha!) and write on a sign (pussy), and he gets ass unequivocally kicked. Great, great, great.

  • 13. Baked Dr. Luny  |  February 19th, 2009 at 7:26 am

    Imagine the beat down that would have come if they actually knew who Hitchens was.

  • 14. kotek besar  |  February 19th, 2009 at 8:40 am

    ROFLMFAO bitch got pwned!

  • 15. rbk  |  February 19th, 2009 at 9:04 am

    #3 – “I think this article sounds more like a high-school jock making fun of the nerds who get stomped for no reason than of an intelligent adult.”

    Are you kidding?! No bigger bully than Hitch. Plus, not only did he start it but now he’ll claim he was the man. Hitch is a fucking bitch. He’s been asking for a good ass-kicking.

  • 16. John Do  |  February 19th, 2009 at 9:47 am

    “I mean, you can attack Hitchens for his ideological instability, and I would wholeheartedly agree with you, but trying to demean the man because he got beaten up in a brawl is just pathetic.”

    No, it isn’t. Hitchens is the one treating this idiotic encounter like it’s a scene out of a John Wayne film. Since the reality appears to be very different from his purported claims of what actually happened, it rather deserves to be revealed, no?

    If anyone comes off as “pathetic” here, it’s Hitchens. And I’d say he’s doing a bang-up job of demeaning himself without any help.

  • 17. aleke  |  February 19th, 2009 at 10:04 am

    Anyway, read the Exile book. You’ll understand why personal attacks are the best form to get at those grotesque people. It’s how the people at the top keep their dominance. It’s also why left-leaning academics in this country have all the power they had in high school. Nil.

  • 18. Doom  |  February 19th, 2009 at 10:46 am

    This is awesome.

  • 19. jim  |  February 19th, 2009 at 11:18 am

    Instant karma is a bitch.


  • 20. Gtard  |  February 19th, 2009 at 1:20 pm

    Ha, Ames, whose entire career is based on articles that are basically long versions of scrawling over political posters, is taking a stand? You claim him defacing a Syrian thugs posters in a foreign land is a stupid risk, yet didn’t the exile do this with Russians for years? Not only that, but I seem to remember an incident when you and Taibbi, who are both like 6’5 200 or something, cowered in your offices after writing harsh diatribes against people.
    You’re an enjoyable writer, but sometimes you’re stupid hpyocrisy pot calling the kettle a negro shtick gets old.

  • 21. Gtard  |  February 19th, 2009 at 1:22 pm

    Also, just posted on the website this came from:

    Update: I got it a bit wrong on how much Hitchens had been roughed up and the exact sequence here.

    He had underplayed it, I guess. From another witness I got that he’d been roughed up more than he let on.

    First of all, there weren’t ten goons, but around six.

    Second, the goon squad, and not just the look-out man, did in fact get to Hitchens. They knocked him down to the ground, kicked him while he was down, and stamped on his writing hand (which I’d known). I had thought they escaped the gang, but they didn’t, not quite; they got roughed up by them before a cabbie got them away.

    Oh, and the errand they were on: Well, they were on their way to a bar. But they hadn’t gotten there yet. It was about, oh, 3 or so in the afternoon. We had downtime between events (which were scheduled around the clock pretty much) and I guess they just wanted to check out a local watering hole.

    Here’s what I know word-of-mouth about the Syrian Nazis: They’re actual Nazis, first of all, having taken inspiration from Hitler and sporting a modified swastika on their posters and flags. They’re a small party, I’m told. They had been banned years ago but are back, but not in force. There are about 300 of them (again, this is what I am told) and are more of a street-gang of bullyboys than an actual party. However, they have the backing of Syria, and they do, when called upon, murder people.

  • 22. 28  |  February 19th, 2009 at 1:35 pm

    aleke’s right, ad hominem is how they keep the working class down. the only appropriate response:

    hey c-hitch, thx 4 teh lulz

  • 23. Kevin  |  February 19th, 2009 at 4:46 pm

    All praise be to Darwin.

  • 24. Doh!  |  February 19th, 2009 at 8:16 pm

    Tard of G, have you noticed at all how Ames left Russia in style? Why you gotta be such a tard. Or turd. Hitchens had it coming, and I enjoyed the article and the beatdown. Ames and Taibbi got scared of guns, not fists. When the Russian Police searched Ames’ office, Mark Ames engaged them in a staring contest. Now that’s respectable. What would you do Gee Tard, pee in your pants?

  • 25. Mark  |  February 19th, 2009 at 8:28 pm

    “Imagine the beat down that would have come if they actually knew who Hitchens was.”

    That’s a great point. They just saw him as some fat-faced Limey fuck, probably unaware of his influential advocacy for American-led devastation of the middle east.

  • 26. LoveAndRockets  |  February 19th, 2009 at 8:31 pm

    It’s a conundrum, if I was traveling with an acquaintance who defaced a political poster in a foreign land, would I help him fight the little guy who attacks him, knowing 10 goons are on the way to kick his ass, or do you join in the fight? On one hand you could get away quicker, on the other you have the defense that “We didn’t do anything!” Would that even matter to the goons? Hmmm.

  • 27. Narcoleptic  |  February 19th, 2009 at 8:34 pm

    You know, I don’t like to laugh at people getting their ass kicked by Nazis, but this entire story is hilarious from start to finish. Somehow a drunken Christopher Hitchens trying to hail a cab with two friends while getting wailed on by a scrawny Syrian Nazi just screams for a soundtrack of “Yackety Sax” (aka the theme song from “Benny Hill”). I think they should have some kind of backyard wrestling league rematch.

  • 28. Mark  |  February 19th, 2009 at 8:41 pm

    “They knocked him down to the ground, kicked him while he was down, and stamped on his writing hand (which I’d known).”

    We’ll see if he finally stops writing…

  • 29. BTraven  |  February 19th, 2009 at 9:33 pm

    As expected. Girl-fight.

    Complete with hair-pulling, bad languange and no punching to the man-breasts of said fat, overweight, out-of-condition Neocon Nutcase.

    Up against a Lebanese under-age child.

    Are we sure he wasn’t just propositioning the boy? And getting his deserved comeuppance.

  • 30. 28  |  February 20th, 2009 at 10:40 am

    hey c-hitz, thx for the lulz

    since that McCaughey post I can’t tell whether the Exiled is a honeypot or a proud return to drug-fueled form. anyway, keep up the good work

  • 31. Alex  |  February 20th, 2009 at 11:28 am

    I just have to laugh at all of this ideological bashing on the false premise that Hitchens is a “neocon”. Rofl

  • 32. Mark  |  February 20th, 2009 at 4:55 pm

    “I just have to laugh at all of this ideological bashing on the false premise that Hitchens is a “neocon”.”

    It’s not false. Hitchens himself has already admitted that he is probably a neoconservative. Look it up.

  • 33. Baltimoron  |  February 20th, 2009 at 4:56 pm

    Hitchens was a lot cooler when he was hanging out with Edward Said and writing pieces like “Broadcasts.”

    Nazis are generally drooling cromags, but they were on the right track here. Stopped clocks and all that.

  • 34. David  |  February 20th, 2009 at 11:02 pm

    Support for a member of the Syrian Nazi Party attacking an American citizen. Why am I not surprised?

  • 35. Alex  |  February 20th, 2009 at 11:56 pm

    “It’s not false. Hitchens himself has already admitted that he is probably a neoconservative. Look it up.”

    Yes, yes it is. Support of an interventionist foreign policy including participation in the Iraq War does not automatically make you a neoconservative.

    ‘His employment of the term “Islamofascist” and his support for the Iraq War have caused Hitchens’s critics to label him a “neoconservative”. Hitchens, however, refuses to embrace this designation,[39] insisting that “I am not a conservative of any kind”. In 2004, Hitchens stated that neoconservative support for US intervention in Iraq convinced him that he was “on the same side as the neo-conservatives” when it came to contemporary foreign policy issues.[90] He has also been known to refer to his association with “temporary neocon allies”.[91]’ wiki

    ‘In 2009 Hitchens was listed by Forbes magazine as one of the “25 most influential liberals in U.S. media.”‘ wiki as well

    Against torture, against the Vietnam War, supported the ACLU numerous times. In 2001 he acknowledged he might be labeled a Libertarian. Far from a neo-con.

  • 36. Snarky  |  February 21st, 2009 at 12:04 am

    Nazis beating up Nazis. Does it get any better? Well sure, they could use lead at high velocity against each other. But that was a great day. Irony, oh baby, thank you for that moment.

  • 37. Steve  |  February 21st, 2009 at 1:26 am

    How is it you’re all rooting for a NEONAZI, over this man? What twisted logic. How progressive!

    Also, how does a “thug,” who by any objective assessment of the likiehood of membership in neo-nazi groups that would also acost three men is at the very least much younger than Hitchens and his companions, become a nerd? Because he used text messaging? What progragandistic nonesense.

    People like you are a disgrace to what the left is supposed to stand for. In particular, how about a little honesty!

  • 38. Mark  |  February 21st, 2009 at 6:04 am

    “Support of an interventionist foreign policy including participation in the Iraq War does not automatically make you a neoconservative.”

    What I was referring to, you dumb fuck, is that Hitchens has already admitted that he is a neoconservative. That’s why I wrote, “Look it up.” It’s not something that is disputed.

  • 39. Alex  |  February 21st, 2009 at 11:44 am

    I was hoping, you dumb fuck, that you would actually read the entirety of my message, including a true quote from Hitchens, in which he stated that he is not a conservative of any kind.

    For the majority of his life he has identified with socialist movements, but as of late has made a transition in the direction of Libertarianism.

  • 40. Snarky  |  February 22nd, 2009 at 3:00 pm

    Alex, A real Progressive isn’t going to engage in grafitti movements across the World. A real Progressive isn’t going to deface random shit to show himself as macho. Just cause someone says he’s a Socialist, or a Progressive, doesn’t mean they actually are. Americans, you should have really gotten that by now, voting for that Fiscal Conservative dude in 2004. He’s got the biggest spending on federal goverment ever, and he’s presented as a fiscal conservative. What’s next, Stalin being a Socialist? Hitler being a Christian? Oh yeah, those two are already branded.

    Just like Chevron, the helpful oil company that “cares about soldiers’ babies”. In America, the brand is everything, even if it contradicts every known fact, eh Alex?

    In reality Hichens is a Neo-Nazi, and Neo-Cons are Neo-Nazis, they both love racism and unlimited wars of agression. So to repeat, a Neo-Nazi beating the shit out of a Neo-Nazi is quite hilarious. 😀 Thank you, Irony, oh baby you can be sexy.

  • 41. aleke  |  February 22nd, 2009 at 10:35 pm

    Ah, Hitchens as a “libertarian”. He’s right about being the George Orwell of our time. A fascist masquerading as a liberator. I think John Dolan wrote it up researched it pretty nicely here:

  • 42. Tam  |  February 23rd, 2009 at 12:10 am

    Alex & Mark: Chris Hitchen’s sole belief is that his Vanity Fair expense account needs to me maximised at all costs.
    A tried and tested way for a hack remain a favored courtier to is by sucking up to the administration in power at any time, preferably by publicly doing a ‘Damascene conversion’ to the fashionable new way of thinking. Hence he was a neocon when there was money in it and now that’s looking less lucrative, he’s realised it was ‘morally wrong’. Hope that clears it up.

  • 43. curious  |  February 25th, 2009 at 10:17 am

    “Bitch”? “Girl-fight”?

  • 44. Jack Lewis  |  February 25th, 2009 at 10:21 am

    I guess Hitch should have been more respectful of the syrian nazi party right? Point well taken.
    Either that or he should have pummeled the nerd or something?

    God forbid nazi thugs should be provoked, we should take care not to hurt their feelings…

  • 45. Tadhg Ó Muiris  |  February 25th, 2009 at 10:55 am

    The SSNP are neither Syrian nor Neo-Nazi. There are a left-of-centre Lebanese party, active in the resistance against Israel, albeit politically eccentric (whence their name); their constituency is largely the Greek Orthodox community in Lebanon.

  • 46. Karim  |  February 25th, 2009 at 11:37 am

    First, about the “Nazis”: they’re the SSNP, a Lebanese party, not Syrian. Their symbol is based on the Indian Wheel of Life – like the swastika was except it was inverted (hence the uninformed Hitchen’s error). There are much more than 300 of them – more like several thousand members (it is a party). They are not Nazis (even if, like many parties founded in the early 1900’s -Phalanges, zionists etc- they have fascist overtones in their original literature. The poster Hitchens so bravely defaced was commemorating the death of a female party member who died fighting the Israelis. Not very clever to deface something like that, especially if you’re a bloody foreigner. A well deserved stomping, really – made more deserved by the way him and his friends lied about the circumstances and smeared the SSNP (regardless of what one thinks of them) with the “Nazi” slur.

  • 47. Pat Kittle  |  February 25th, 2009 at 12:18 pm


    1) A violent response to a non-violent offense is cute, and…

    2) Mocking a lisp is cute.

    Does that apply to everyone?

  • 48. crow  |  February 25th, 2009 at 2:36 pm

    He really, really needs to lay off the booze. Its impairing his judgement in critical ways now. The thrashing was a wee message from his Higher Power to sober up. Or at least 12 Step Lebanese street theater.

    Great photo of the Hitch, btw. Never looked better than when he got ‘boarded! Sad there’s none from the Beirut Beatdown…

  • 49. RonMox  |  February 25th, 2009 at 7:56 pm

    I wish I were there to see Hitche’s ass get kicked. About time.. I wonder if he was drunk at the time…as he usually is…

  • 50. gangpapist  |  February 25th, 2009 at 8:24 pm

    I’m an OIF vet, so i guess that makes me a Nazi (the kind you don’t like), so’s y’all would love to see me get my ass gang-kicked.

    Here’s your chance! I will meet you at a NYC spot of your choosing. Rules are: just me vs. as many of y’all as you can muster.

    Hey, no what would be cool? If that slut Hirsi Ali got her sellout pussy raped by a bunch of real Muslims.

    Anyways, holla.

  • 51. Nadine  |  February 26th, 2009 at 9:06 am

    You Americans sure are something else, I love how you refer to the SSNP as Nazis, why do you speak of things you don’t know???? Ignorant idiots!

  • 52. gangpapist  |  February 26th, 2009 at 9:30 am


    It is very easy for this particular type of Americans to use the term “Nazi.”

    They usually use it to dehumanize any American they disagree with politically or even aesthetically.

    In this case, they let the n-bomb slip a little too quick, and probably wish they could take it back (in reference to the SSNP).

    Hey, know what would be awesome, y’all? If that Jew Liebermann got his ass stomped by some corn-fed Midwestern Hammer Skins. Ya, that would kick ass. Jew.

  • 53. Nadine  |  February 26th, 2009 at 10:57 am

    Hitchens in Beirut, again
    I was just informed that the boring travel companion of Hitchens in Beirut, i.e., Michael Totten, confirms that Hitchens indeed tried to deface the SSNP’s commemorative sign near Wimpy which notes the brave operation by Khalid `Alwan, a Beiruti young man, against Israeli terrorist soldiers who were sitting in the cafe defacing our capital. A small sign was mounted on the location of the brave operation. Hitchens and his boring travel companion are making noises about the ideology of the SSNP and they have been referring to its “inverted” swastika. Now I have never been a fan of the SSNP and have been critical of its ideology, but the real Nazi party in Lebanon–for anybody who knows anything about Lebanon, which does not include Hitchens and Totten and that infamous Forbes writer who could not even get the date of March 14 right– is none other than the party that invited and hosted Hitchens in Beirut. The right-wing Zionist apologists, Hitchens et al, were in Beirut at the invitation of the sleaziest political group imaginable: the so-called Now Lebanon media outfit (I call it Now Hariri), which is tied to Future (Hariri) media, which is tied to Quantum group which is tied to Lebanon Renaissance Foundation, which is tied to nepharious political projects in Lebanon with the stamp of Cheney-Bush-Hariri-House of Saud-Gemayyel. The leader of Lebanon Renaissance Foundation, is none other than Elie Khoury who led Saatchi and Saatchi which reportedly helped the US occupation in Iraq to sell its mission in Arabic, and helped design (for a hefty sum) the slogan of the Hariri family in Lebanon: Lebanon first. Brilliant, huh? The political coalition that hosted Hitchens in Lebanon include the Phalanges Party and Khoury’s political affiliations are with the Lebanese Forces. So the closest to the Lebanese Nazis–the closest to the Nazies of the Arab world–are none other than the Phalanges and the Lebanese Forces, and one wonders if Hitchens heroic claims are true, why he was not seen defacing the crosses or the cedars of the true Lebanese Nazis. But then again: has there any credibility left to somebody like Hitchens whose political commentaries have been amounting to nothing more than the slogans drafted by speech writers of Bush’s White House? This is a man who now it seems supports every sitting American president and who waits for a president to leave office before he dares to offer criticisms of his administration. The champion of Bush is now posing as champion of Obama: enough said. A man with no principles and no credibility left was astouned to face sandniggers at the American University of Beirut campus who challenged his positions on every issue in foreign policy. What was most shocking for Hitchens and his neo-conservative clique is that those who challenged him on the AUB campus were not Islamic fundamnetalists who he can dismiss as “Islamofascists”–a term he regularly uses but he cowardly avoided using during his Hariri trip in Lebanon–but seclar leftists from different sects in Lebanon. There are people who would lament the political transformations of Hitchens and talk about his not only championing of Bush’s wars but his change of views on the Palestinian question. In other words, the man is a fraud because he argues that Sep. 11 opened his eyes to the threat of Islamofascists but he can’t explain why he also conveniently stopped criticizing Israel–something he was willing to do for a small fee back in the 1980s and 1990s. Personally, I did not like Hitchens during his leftist poseur days, and like him less now, and his sleazy, sexist, and vulgar tone regarding women is rather repulsive to me. Back in the 1980s, when I read that he was claiming on every media that would host him that he once interviewed Abu Nidal, I knew that this guy is a fabricator and liar.
    Posted by As’ad at 6:06 AM

  • 54. Ralph Kramden  |  February 26th, 2009 at 7:05 pm

    I wouldn’t make fun of someone getting jumped specially by a Nazi thug. Come on, Hitchens has become a jack-ass, but don’t lower yourself to glorifying a stomping. The waterboarding, let’s asking him to be the victim of a pro-there are plenty of sadists out there who would be willing to practice the technique. Moreover, Hitchen is a willing subject to the procedure. What a difference from a torture victim.

  • 55. San Francisco  |  February 26th, 2009 at 10:31 pm

    SSNP is NOT a Nazi party, and the members are not Syrian they are Lebanese leftists. If you people don’t know the hell you are talking about you should refrain. Thanks!!!

  • 56. abraham  |  February 27th, 2009 at 7:09 am

    I would have preferred that Michael Totten got the beating, except not the pussy little beating that Hitchens took, but the type that sends one to a wheelchair for life with a continuous drooling.

  • 57. Ramzi Nohra  |  February 27th, 2009 at 8:27 am

    Well, take the piss out of Hitchens for the waterboarding if you must, but the truth is that it would be easier for someone of his political opinions to say it wasnt torture, rather than to undergo it himself and say it was.

    However, in regard to this SSNP incident, he has shown himself to be a twat of the highest order. Because:
    A) there are plenty of other fascist parties in Lebanon – some aligned to the March 14th parties who were sponsoring his trip to Lebanon
    B) he defaced a monument to someone who bravely attacked two soldiers of an occupying army. How the fuck is that fascism? Seems a pretty honourable action to me. Surely supporting an illegal is more akin to fascism then attacking it.

  • 58. Groucho  |  February 28th, 2009 at 6:09 am

    “…and stamped on his writing hand”

    Had they wanted to harm him, they’d have gone for the drinking hand.

  • 59. sanman  |  February 28th, 2009 at 10:36 pm

    Hey War Nerds, I’d like to see an article done on the recent fighting in Sri Lanka, and also the latest coup in Bangladesh. Both seem to have been pretty brutal and heavy enough on casualties. Can’t anyone come up with some incisive and entertaining analysis of that stuff? Or are you guys too wimpy for that?

  • 60. Mar C  |  March 1st, 2009 at 11:02 am

    Nazis fighting nazis? Give them weapons! Just make sure to take it away from the winner in time.

  • 61. qunfuz  |  March 3rd, 2009 at 6:29 am

    The SSNP is not a Nazi or fascist party. Its members in Lebanon are Lebanese.

  • 62. BTraven  |  March 22nd, 2009 at 3:02 pm

    > 37. How is it you’re all rooting for a NEONAZI, over this man? What twisted logic. How progressive!

    We certainly are _not_ rooting for Hitchens.

    But we are glad that you recognize him as one of your own. ‘Fascist’ would have been sufficient. imo. But you apparently know better than us.

  • 63. CiciedenUhder  |  August 13th, 2009 at 5:51 pm

    This look interesting,so far.
    If there are any real people here looking to network, leave me a post.
    Oh, and yes I’m a real person LOL.


  • 64. Christof  |  August 3rd, 2010 at 9:20 pm

    Totally agree with Ames. Frank – you are pathetic, a pre-adolescent attempt at comment relevancy.

    Disagreeing on ideology and strongly held views is fine, but being a total idiot like I am, spending my nights dreaming of being one of the tumor polyps in Hitchens’ throat–that’s enough to make me wet my bed.

  • 65. Reality Hurts  |  August 22nd, 2010 at 7:39 am

    hahahahaha, Neocon Hitchens is such a turd.

  • 66. sam  |  February 19th, 2011 at 12:10 pm

    Hitchens makes me hope for an afterlife.
    I wish they “the thugs” have done better.

  • 67. Matt  |  August 28th, 2011 at 1:21 pm

    I think this is quite pathetic. You are so obviously a pre-biased idealist of some sort that you would rather take sides with a Syrian “Nazi” than a British intellectual. I’ll bet you know more about Loony Tunes than the Syrian nationals, let alone Christopher Hitchens.

    But whatever. If believing that Hitchens is an asshole lets you sleep at night, then please continue with this rant. The only one you’re fooling is yourself.

  • 68. niccolo and donkey  |  December 20th, 2011 at 11:20 am

    Deservedly stomped.

  • 69. DeeboCools  |  December 20th, 2011 at 2:25 pm

    I like Hitchens because like me he follows a bottom troll philosophy: Just because some dickhead jumps you doesn’t mean you have to stand there and “bravely” fight them off. Fleeing is a perfectly fine option for us bottom trolls? How does this reflect badly on Hitchens character?

  • 70. John Drinkwater  |  December 20th, 2011 at 9:37 pm

    Too bad the accepted narrative about Hitchens, “satirized” today in by Neal Pollack, is that he was some sort of physical as well as verbal brawler. A load of bullshit, that.

  • 71. Dmitry  |  June 29th, 2013 at 8:50 am

    Wow… all along I worshipped a British douchebag. What a pathetic loser I am.

Leave a Comment

(Open to all. Comments can and will be censored at whim and without warning.)


Required, hidden

Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed