Then why did they bother?
So Hitchen’s could drum up enough interest so that he could get on the news and make his case, and a wider audience would hear about the Pope’s putative crimes. And judging by the video in your link, it worked.
IM(not so)HO, I think they just saw an opportunity to attack the Catholic Church while the public was against them. Their cause clearly was not to make people aware of the Catholic abuse scandal, as you wouldn’t hear about this news item unless you already knew about the scandal. And, AFAIK, they’ve done nothing for the cause since.
Now, maybe I’m giving them too much credit. Hitchens ignorance on the matter did seem rather authentic, not only being unable to ever articulate what specifically was illegal about the scandal, but honestly seeming perplexed by the concept–at least, in the interview I’ve seen.
But, IMO, seeing as even Dopers seem to have lost the ire they once had, whether PR stunt or not, it didn’t really amount to much.
I am brave enough to answer this. No, he is not.
He articulated it well enough, in the video linked in the OP amonst other places. He thinks the various memos that have been linked from Ratzingers time as head of a Vatican office concerned with investigating clergy he conspired to obstruct justice regarding child abuse investigations. You can argue whether or not that might be true, but Hitchens is plenty specific on what specific charge he wants Ratzinger brought up on and why.
Well, he’s probably worse then Hitler at some things. How good a painter is the Pope?
Was Hitchens ignorant on the matter? 
He was just a man, after all. And in his defence, his illness would have prevented him from doing much else for the cause. The partner in crime, Richard Dawkins, is alive and well. He’s probably still trying to dismantle religion and destroy ignorance as he sees it. What will he try next?
Agreed, although some take his boyhood involvement with the Hitler Youth as evidence of him being a Nazi Pope. :rolleyes: :dubious: