Twisted--- i dont think so. I didnt feel sorry for Al shapton, and i DONT need to feel sorry for him. As a matter of fact, i feel sorry for Hitchens. First of all, he seemed awfully afraid of Al shapton, that the reverend had to demand him to address him and not address the meek, mouse highly annoying moderator.

I thought that was hilarious. Second, Both of them are a specie of different intellectual calibre. Hitchens seemed painfully bored when Al spoke and Al--seem discreetly bored when hitchens was talking incoherently & endlessly. Was he drunk????

It seems both of them ---had a quoto intellectual imcompatability. I support the reverend of course. He asked Hitchens a direct question--- So u blieve that only religious people do wickend things- in the history of mankind?And athiests r all innocent? Hitchens as a rationalist SURPRISINGLY evaded the Q, he went into exhaustive empty repartee of intoxicated under-the influence-of intellectualism--(i mean he responded with a diaorea incoherent lectures and narcissisistic verbage.) I couldnt understand why the audience were laughing at his numerous, incoherent inuendos. They all seemed pre-disposed--as u are of course--Twisted--

....they were all disposed to please him and applause and laugh. Thats total ridiculous. All he did was sit there in his fat--alcoholic a$$, roll around his spectacles---to highlight himself as a superior intellect and indulge in endless repartee of malady rhetorics. By the end of it-- i seriosly desired Al shapton to get up, beat the crap out of him, and make him say--- Lord Jesus--- i repent.
