Christopher Hitchen: A liar, or just insane?

What does it say about Slate that they let their writers mislead the public? What does it say about the trustworthiness of their editorial judgements when a writer is allowed to print falshood as truth? Here's Eric Alterman:

...the madman, Hitchens, writes in Slate:

"The Lancet figures are almost certainly inflated, not least because they were taken from selective war-torn provinces. But there is no reason why they may not come to reflect reality more closely. It is a reminder of the nature of the enemy we face, and not only in Iraq, and a very clear picture of the sort of people who would have a free hand in Iraq if the coalition were to depart."

In fact, the first claim is flat-out false. The study specifically did not pick particularly violent provinces, as Hitchens could have discovered if he looked at the study, not that he gives any impression of having any experience with this type of statistical sampling.

We await Slate's corrections.