The media’s reaction to Seymour Hersh’s bin Laden scoop has been disgraceful

[Jesus Malverde]

SEYMOUR HERSH HAS DONE THE PUBLIC a great service by breathing life into questions surrounding the official narrative of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden. Yet instead of trying to build off the details of his story, or to disprove his assertions with additional reporting, journalists have largely attempted to tear down the messenger.

Barrels of ink have been spilled ripping apart Hersh’s character, while barely any follow-up reporting has been done to corroborate or refute his claims—even though there’s no doubt that the Obama administration has repeatedly misinformed and misled the public about the incident. Even less attention has been paid to the little follow-up reporting that we did get, which revealed that the CIA likely lied about its role in finding bin Laden, which it used to justify torture to the public.

Hersh has attempted to force the media to ask questions about its role in covering a world-shaping event—but it’s clear the media has trouble asking such questions if the answers are not the ones they want to hear.

Hersh’s many critics, almost word-for-word, gave the same perfunctory two-sentence nod to his best-known achievements—breaking the My Lai massacre in 1969 (for which he won the Pulitzer) and exposing the Abu Ghraib torture scandal 35 years later—before going on to call him every name in the book: “conspiracy theorist,” “off the rails,” “crank.” Yet most of this criticism, over the thousands of words written about Hersh’s piece in the last week, has amounted to “That doesn’t make sense to me,” or “That’s not what government officials told me before,” or “How are we to believe his anonymous sources?”

http://www.cjr.org/analysis/seymour_hersh_osama_bin_laden.php

[orpupilofnature57]

1. MSM,, Misanthrope Sycophant Monsters

Their dismissive disdain is a cover-up for their servitude to TPTB .

[FlatBaroque]

62. Top Comment

Succinct; to the point.

[leveymg]

2. In the end, history will show that he got this one (mostly) right, as usual.

Investigative journalism is rarely perfect. When dealing with covert operations and classified military programs, any investigation is bound to be limited by its sources. But, if the judgement of the journalist or analyst is good enough, the truth is in there. Hersh is about as good as it gets.

This story is likely no exception, except it reflects badly on the Obama Administration as well as its predecessor, so many won't accept it, even if it were perfect.

[Gothmog]

3. The Hersh story is bogus and fell apart on examination

[Fast Walker 52]

6. did it now?

source please

[Jesus Malverde]

11. likely didn't read the article

or heard it on the boob tube.

[paleotn]

23. Both of his sources are weak to put it mildly....

....neither had any direct knowledge of what went on. It's primarily 3rd and 4th party hearsay that Hersh expects us to believe as gospel. I think not. Any other evidence? Not one shred. It's a shame that after such a storied career, Hersh has gone the way of the conspiracy nuts.

http://www.vox.com/2015/5/11/8584473/seymour-hersh-osama-bin-laden

[Gothmog]

83. The Vox story is well done

[66 dmhlt]

24. Here you go - and even got a couple of them for you ...

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/seymour-hershs-osama-bin-laden-claims-dont-pass-the-smell-test/

http://www.vox.com/2015/5/11/8584473/seymour-hersh-osama-bin-laden

[Fast Walker 52]

101. ok, thanks

[sabrina 1]

30. Another Reporter has come forward to BACK UP his story. This is how it always happens with

Hersh it seems.

He breaks a story, usually facts that many would prefer remain secret. He is attacked, and then eventually, he is proven to have been correct.

Our media FELL APART long ago, after it was purchased by Corporations.

We have a few good journalists left, one of them is Hersh.

[SidDithers]

33. Link?...nt

Sid

[Jesus Malverde]

35. Ny times wrote the article

I posted it here, can't be bothered to look it up for you.



Jesus

[sabrina 1]

59. Raelynn Hillhouse, wrote this story back in 2011. She says Hersh's story 'is spot on' though she

believes he had different sources than hers.

She is known for her reporting on intelligence stories and at that time, 2011, her reporting was picked up by other media.

All anyone has to do is google. In almost all the main details, Hersh's story matches hers from 2011.

[Jesus Malverde]

60. Some people are google impaired

Jesus

[sabrina 1]

81. Anyone who seriously wants to know the facts, finds them themselves, rather than demanding

links etc.

To be honest, I thought Bin Laden, who had diabetes which required dialyses, was dead for years.

So all the hoopla over this was of little interest to me. I am opposed to extra-judicial assassinations and do not consider them to be 'heroic' in any sense of the word.

As for the burial at sea part of the official story 'we wanted to show respect', that was an incredible claim.

First you riddle a supposedly dying man with bullets, then you want to show respect!!


Then give the body to his family, or the country of origin.

Story never made sense, which is probably why it never had the impact that was expected. By that time, OBL was old news.

[Jesus Malverde]

37. Heya

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026668881

[Android3.14]

72. Really?

Your comment is bogus and falls apart on examination.

[Gothmog]

82. Really

Hersh's story does not hold up to scrutiny. Even CNN was able to prove that this story is false http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/11/opinions/bergen-bin-laden-story-a-lie/index.html

Hersh's account of the bin Laden raid is a farrago of nonsense that is contravened by a multitude of eyewitness accounts, inconvenient facts and simple common sense.

Let's start with the claim that the only shots fired at the Abbottabad compound were the ones that killed bin Laden. That ignores the fact that two SEALs on the mission, Matt Bissonnette, author of "No Easy Day," and Robert O'Neill have publicly said that there were a number of other people killed that night, including bin Laden's two bodyguards, one of his sons and one of the bodyguard's wives. Their account is supplemented by many other U.S. officials who have spoken on the record to myself or to other journalists.

I was the only outsider to visit the Abbottabad compound where bin Laden lived before the Pakistani military demolished it. The compound was trashed, littered almost everywhere with broken glass and several areas of it were sprayed with bullet holes where the SEALS had fired at members of bin Laden's entourage and family, or in one case exchanged fire with one of his bodyguards. The evidence at the compound showed that many bullets were fired the night of bin Laden's death.

Common sense would tell you that the idea that Saudi Arabia was paying for bin Laden's expenses while he was living in Abbottabad is simply risible. Bin Laden's principal goal was the overthrow of the Saudi royal family as a result of which his Saudi citizenship was revoked as far back as 1994.

Why would the Saudis pay for the upkeep of their most mortal enemy? Indeed, why wouldn't they get their close allies, the Pakistanis, to look the other way as they sent their assassins into Pakistan to finish him off?

Common sense would also tell you that if the Pakistanis were holding bin Laden and the U.S. government had found out this fact, the easiest path for both countries would not be to launch a U.S. military raid into Pakistan but would have been to hand bin Laden over quietly to the Americans.

The Pakistan source for this story denies having evidence of the facts contained

The only source Hersh refers to by name in his 10,000-word piece is Assad Durrani, who was the head of ISI during the early 1990s, around two decades before the bin Laden raid occurred. Hersh portrays Durrani as generally supportive of Hersh's various conclusions.

When I emailed Durrani after the Hersh piece appeared, Durrani said he had "no evidence of any kind" that the ISI knew that bin Laden was hiding in Abbottabad but he still could "make an assessment that this could be plausible." This is hardly a strong endorsement of one of the principal claims of Hersh's piece.

This story has some real holes. The Saudis would not pay to keep Bin Ladin alive given the fact that they were his number one target. The compound was shot up in the raid which is inconsistent with Hersh's claim and his one source does not back up his story.

[Android3.14]

92. Opinion piece by someone defending their own story

Sorry, Goth, but that, as the OP stated, is the problem.

If there was a cover-up, then his observations at the compound would be accurate, but his interpretation would be incorrect, either by intent or otherwise..

Bergen contradicts Hersh's story by quoting people who would have been involved in the cover-up. Hersh has the journalism chops, and the Administration has lost many progressive's trust.

[OilemFirchen]

94. Bergen's observation about bin Laden's relationship to Saudi Arabia is an important key.

I get the impression that some here don't recall, don't know, or willfully ignore what set off the wealthy bin Laden in the first place:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beliefs_and_ideology_of_Osama_bin_Laden

Bin Laden was born in Saudi Arabia and had a close relationship with the Saudi royal family, but his opposition to the Saudi government stemmed from his radical ideology. The Saudi decision to allow the U.S. military into the country in 1990 to defend against a possible attack by Saddam Hussein upset bin Laden, although he was not necessarily opposed to the royal family at this time or going to war with Iraq and even offered to send his mujahedeen from Afghanistan to defend Saudi Arabia should Iraq attack, an offer which was rebuked by King Fahd. From his point of view, "for the Muslim Saudi monarchy to invite non-Muslim American troops to fight against Muslim Iraqi soldiers was a serious violation of Islamic law".

Bin Laden, in his 1996 declaration entitled "Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places", identified several grievances that he had about Saudi Arabia, the birthplace and holy land of Islam. Bin Laden said these grievances about Saudi Arabia:

List of nine grievances follow - excised for fair use.

Bin Laden wanted to overthrow the Saudi monarchy (and the governments of Middle Eastern states)[18] and establish an "Islamic Republic" according to Shari'a law (Islamic Holy Law), to "unite all Muslims and to establish a government which follows the rule of the Caliphs.

The notion that the Sauds were providing him assistance is ludicrous.

[trumad]

4. That's because it's bogus.

[Jesus Malverde]

5. .

[redstateblues]

20. Why haven't we heard from

The Paidtani sources that his whole story rests on. Was one of them named Curveball perhaps?

[Jesus Malverde]

36. WTF is a paidtani

JM

[DisgustipatedinCA]

87. I think it's a Thai noodle dish.

I could be wrong. .

[Jesus Malverde]

97. I'll take one with extra hot sauce?...nt

[stonecutter357]

7. That's because

he is full of shit...

[Jesus Malverde]

9. Thanks for the bump...nt

[yeoman6987]

8. Did we get Bin Laden? Yes! That's what the

American public cares about and helped reelect our president with.

[Geronimoe]

10. Have any evidence of who was killed or if anyone was killed?

A sea burial or dumping a body over mountains is not proof. A sailor on the ship that supposedly had the sea burial claim it didn't occur. And seals claim they tossed the body parts out of their chopper. Why?

[Jesus Malverde]

13. Not only that

We have two different seals who claim to have killed him.

[still_one]

32. Sure haven't seen any bin Laden videos lately, and AQ web sites themselves acknowledged

his death:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/07/world/asia/07qaeda.html?_r=0

tin foil haters, and of course Elvis and JFK are still alive also

[tridim]

77. Neo-DU is all about normalizing tin foil hats

They think it makes them look spiffy.

[zeemike]

12. Or to paraphrase it.

The end justifies the means.
lies in the name of electing the D are justified...what a sad state we are in.

[yeoman6987]

14. You don't think the Republicabs are behind this?

We have a hard enough time getting a democratic president elected three consecutive times without adding to the already incredible odds.

[zeemike]

18. That is just the rational for the end justifying the means.

And boogie men serve that purpose...to scare us into accepting the principle.
And that is how the Republicons serve the purpose.

[Geronimoe]

19. True

The last Democratic President was Jimmy Carter.

[Marr]

21. Why on earth would you assume Republicans are behind this?

Seriously-- anything that counters the official narrative that paints the government in the best light must by nature be a political trick from the Republicans? Do you know how weird that sounds?

Personally, I always assumed that the official story was largely rah-rah bullshit. The official story is never the complete truth with things like this-- there are too many complex political concerns, international and domestic. And really, the government lies even when there isn't a reason. Why on earth would anyone assume they're telling the complete truth about something this big, when they can easily construct any story they like?

[freedom fighter jh]

26. Can't imagine how this story would hurt Bernie. nt

[orpupilofnature57]

16. + 1000 !!! It's not a football game .

[treestar]

17. Yes and the rest is starting to sound like 911 trutherism

Sometimes things are what they seem.

[freedom fighter jh]

28. Seems to me the official 911 story is impossible and therefore must be false.

Not sure what that means about the Bin Laden raid.

[Jesus Malverde]

45. Got to wonder about anyone who parrots a bush narrative...nt

[treestar]

86. Now you've gone completely nuts

And I bet its the same people. Not it's not generally thought of as a Bush Narrative. It's just what happened, and Bushco took advantage of it. Shamefully. But that's all they did.

[Jesus Malverde]

96. Lulz

"That's all they did"



Where ha been tree? Talk about giving bush a pass, forward looker eh?

JM

[freedom fighter jh]

89. Yes, you do. nt

[treestar]

85. out there conspiracy theories

And journalists know how to get attention these days. Come up with outrageousness that gets the credulous riled up. Made up factors, attempting to explain something that happened in a roundabout way that is a lot more complicated than what happened.

911 is impossible to have happened the way the truthers state it. They make up this complicated conspiracy. it was simply a terrorist attack that Bush used to forward his agenda. Bush is plenty evil without having planned 911, but some people feel they must twist themselves into pretzel to make it more complicated than that.

[freedom fighter jh]

91. You're the one talking conspiracy, not me.

"The truthers" are a lot of varied people with varied points of view, some with theories about what really happened on 911 (some of which theories contradict one another, so they could not all be true) and others simply convinced that the official story is impossible. "The way the truthers state it" is a meaningless phrase, because there is a great variety of ways that truthers see it.

Credulous: Believing that three steel-framed high rise towers fell, each descent taking less than a minute, because airplanes had struck two of the towers.

[KingCharlemagne]

15. K - N - R. Here's what we do know by the administration's own account: it

blatantly violated the Geneva Conventions by allegedly disposing of bin Laden's corpse in an unmarked grave. I'd like to see the defenders of the official narrative defend that shit or at least have the decency to STFU the next time one of our adversaries defiles the corpse of an American service member. We no longer have ANY STANDING in that regard. And that's by the administration's own admission.

Sorry about that, parents, spouses and children of American service members. There's no such thing as 'law' when it's the War on Terror.

[SusanCalvin]

55. "There's no such thing as 'law' when it's the War on Terror. "

That's the part that's always bothered me, and the part I don't buy.

He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.
Thomas Paine

[KingCharlemagne]

66. Thomas Paine had amazing powers of

prophecy, did he not? (Great quote, by the way.)

[SusanCalvin]

68. He did.

And just to show that no good deed goes unpunished:

Derided by the public and abandoned by his friends because of his religious views, Paine died at 59 Grove Street in Greenwich Village, New York City, on June 8, 1809. Although the original building is no longer there, the present building has a plaque noting that Paine died at this location. At the time of his death, most American newspapers reprinted the obituary notice from the New York Citizen, which read in part: "He had lived long, did some good and much harm." Only six mourners came to his funeral, two of whom were black, most likely freedmen.

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Thomas_Paine

[KingCharlemagne]

74. I'm no expert on Paine, but I do seem to recall he was one of the

few "revolutionists" who was an outright abolitionist, when abolitionism was the fringiest of fringe ideas, kind of like women's 'right to vote' ca. 1815. So no surprise if two of Paine's mourners were African American freedmen.

[SusanCalvin]

76. He didn't appear to have much of a filter

for expediency or political correctness.

Kinda like a presidential candidate we could mention.....

[cali]

22. JM, I haven't been following this story closely at all

In fact, I didn't follow the original story closely at all. I've never been terribly interested in the killing of bin Laden.

But isn't it all just he said/he said on both sides?

In any case, I expect the government to always glamorize stories like the killing of bin Laden and the media to run with it.

I'm not sure how much it matters.

[SusanCalvin]

49. I wasn't too interested either

but now my interest is piqued. Guess I'll go read the original article. Especially since the source quoted in the OP is CJR.

I've always thought dumping the body at sea (if in fact it was, apparently) was conveeeeeeeeeenient, not to mention downright fishy. Didn't realize it was a violation of the Geneva Conventions (if I'd been thinking, I'd have realized that was logical), but nothing surprises me anymore.

[bvar22]

84. Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman

All you need to know.

[Jesus Malverde]

98. Excellent two examples.

[BeyondGeography]

25. If OBL was still alive it would be disgraceful

Ergo, the vast majority of people have moved on and the audience for this debate is minute, making Hersh an easy target. But at least Sy got paid for a feature article by the LRB instead of a blog post recommended by David Remnick, whose editorial judgment has been pretty sound over the years.

[still_one]

34. Multiple AQ sources came out saying he was killed. The only ones that don't are those that believe

the conspiracy theories

[Fuddnik]

27. The story makes all the sense in the world.

Everybody gets what they want out of the deal. Except maybe Osama.

The US kills Bin Laden.
The Saudi's are happy as hell to have him dead, and not be able to reveal any information on just which Saudi Royals were funding him.
The Pakistani's remove a huge embarrassment, and get official diplomatic cover in doing so.

[PosterChild]

70. Actually the Pakistani's were embaresesed by the raid, not...

...given cover. There is speculation that they are behind the "sources" for hersh's fantasy reporting, in order to save face for what was a huge failure once their part.

[MohRokTah]

29. That's because Hersh's story is complete bullshit tinfoil hat nuttery. eom

[Jesus Malverde]

31. I guess we'll add tin foil nuttery to the list..

Hersh’s many critics, almost word-for-word, gave the same perfunctory two-sentence nod to his best-known achievements—breaking the My Lai massacre in 1969 (for which he won the Pulitzer) and exposing the Abu Ghraib torture scandal 35 years later—before going on to call him every name in the book: “conspiracy theorist,” “off the rails,” “crank.” Yet most of this criticism, over the thousands of words written about Hersh’s piece in the last week, has amounted to “That doesn’t make sense to me,” or “That’s not what government officials told me before,” or “How are we to believe his anonymous sources?”

Thanks for your insightful contribution.

[iandhr]

38. Correct me if I am wrong

But wasn't his first claim that we didn't get bin Laden at all.

[Jesus Malverde]

39. His claim is that there was no shootout

Seeing that his hideout was 100 yards from pakistans West Point, he might be on to something.

The house was 100 yards from the gate of the Kakul Military Academy, an army run institution where top officers train. A Pakistan intelligence official said the property where bin Laden was staying was 3,000 square feet.

An American administration official said the compound was built in 2005 at the end of a narrow dirt road with "extraordinary" security measures. He said it had 12 to 18-feet walls topped with barbed wire with two security gates and no telephone or Internet service connected to it.

Critics have long accused elements of Pakistan's security establishment of protecting bin Laden, though Islamabad has always denied this. Ties between the United States and Pakistan have hit a low point in recent months over the future of Afghanistan, and any hint of possible Pakistani collusion with bin Laden could hit them hard even amid the jubilation of getting American's No. 1 enemy.

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/national_world/2011/05/02/bin-ladens-hideout-located-near-pakistans-military-academy.html

[randome]

40. Not his claim but the claim of a retired officer who was not privy to what occurred.

In other words, a useless source. It's depressing to see so many leap to the conclusion -unsupported by evidence- that Obama is a liar.

People don't even try to be objective these days. They just latch onto whatever Internet narrative pleases them.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

[JoePhilly]

47. Their logic runs in the opposite direction ... Obama IS a liar ... therefore ...

... this story, lacking any evidence, must be true!!!!!

[randome]

53. That sounds about right.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

[FLPanhandle]

41. It's disgraceful people cling to a BS story

Oh well, some people love conspiracy theories even when they've been debunked.

Hersh is a charlatan who made a bunch of money on a bogus story, he doesn't care about what people call him as long as the bank account keeps growing.

[Jesus Malverde]

42. We can add charlatan to the list

Hersh’s many critics, almost word-for-word, gave the same perfunctory two-sentence nod to his best-known achievements—breaking the My Lai massacre in 1969 (for which he won the Pulitzer) and exposing the Abu Ghraib torture scandal 35 years later—before going on to call him every name in the book: “conspiracy theorist,” “off the rails,” “crank.” Yet most of this criticism, over the thousands of words written about Hersh’s piece in the last week, has amounted to “That doesn’t make sense to me,” or “That’s not what government officials told me before,” or “How are we to believe his anonymous sources?”

Thanks for your insightful contribution.

[FLPanhandle]

43. Please do, it's well earned.

and accurate.

[Jesus Malverde]

44. Kinda a old English term but I'll take it in the smear

But not refute category.

[FLPanhandle]

51. Then you don't understand the word Smear

You should put my term in the "calling him what he is" category.

[grasswire]

95. isn't that what they say about Glenn Greenwald?

In it for the money?

[JaneyVee]

46. Why the hell would anyone believe Pakistani ex-intel?

[Jesus Malverde]

48. Why the hell would anyone believe two US Seals

Both claiming they were the ones who double tapped OBL?

[JaneyVee]

67. Hersh said the body was riddled with bullets...

Which would support claim more than one shooter.

[OilemFirchen]

50. Can't get past this:

Barrels of ink have been spilled ripping apart Hersh’s character, while barely any follow-up reporting has been done to corroborate or refute his claims—even though there’s no doubt that the Obama administration has repeatedly misinformed and misled the public about the incident.

A claim the author backs up with a four-year-old Guardian editorial. Indeed - Trevor Timm, columnist at the CJR - where is the follow-up reporting?

[Jesus Malverde]

54. Good point

Least your digging down

[OilemFirchen]

80. Let's just call it due diligence, shall we?

There's this:

First of all, denigrating a legendary reporter who has broken more major stories than almost anyone alive as a “conspiracy theorist”...

... which begins an emothionally-written graph, dependent on the very loose definition of "almost"...

But more importantly this:

As a simple example, which Hersh himself stated in this fascinating On The Media interview, how many people knew about the Bush administration’s manipulation of intelligence before the Iraq war? Hundreds? Over a thousand? How many knew about the NSA’s mass phone metadata program aimed at Americans until Edward Snowden revealed it? A thousand? Ten thousand? It stayed secret for more than seven years until a single person—a contractor, not an NSA employee—exposed it.

Many people knew about Bush's subterfuge and worte about it extensively and contemporaneously. Nor did it take "hundreds" or "thousands" within his administration to keep it "secret". A small cadre of devotees would have (and did do) the trick.

And Snowden's metadata "revelation"? That "secret" was in the public record for many years, admitted to by the government itself.

This might be interesting to you (h/t Cha):

How Solid Is This Sy Hersh Story About the bin Laden Raid?

Why didn't the story appear in The New Yorker?
Many of Seymour Hersh's most influential stories of the past few decades appeared in the pages of The New Yorker. So why didn't this one? Plenty of people on Twitter have wondered just that. Appearing in The New Yorker — well known for its intense fact-checking operation — would have bolstered Hersh's Homeland-worthy claims. However, Hersh's story also completely contradicts a story that his primary journalistic venue had published about the Osama bin Laden raid, Nicholas Schmidle's 2011 story, "Getting Bin Laden." That story was briefly questioned after publication, too, for the fact that the journalist managed to portray the thoughts of the 23 SEALs who took part in the raid without talking to any of them. Editor-in-chief David Remnick defended the article in an interview with the Washington Post, “The sources spoke to our fact-checkers. I know who they are. Those are the rules of the road around here. We have the time to do this."

...

"I thoroughly stand by the story we published," Remnick said. "Look, there is a difference between what people say loosely or in speeches and what we publish." He added later, "I was willing, and am still willing, to go to the wall with investigative journalism. But if he and I disagree, it is not an easy thing. I hope we will work again together. I hope you will print this: I wish him all the best, and I think he is one of the great journalists of our age." A post at Vox dismantling Hersh's story claims that The New Yorker "had rejected it repeatedly." It also notes that Hersh has not written an investigative piece for the magazine since a 2012 story that asserted — questionably, in the minds of many observers — that the U.S. had secretly trained Iranian terrorists at a military base in Nevada.

The New Yorker last published a Seymour Hersh story only two months ago; the reporter returned to Vietnam for an update on hist first big story, and the one his reputation continues to depend on most, his investigation into the My Lai massacre. Hersh has written several critical stories about the Obama administration and Syria for The London Review of Books in the past few years. Neither of the stories have been backed up by other reporting. In 2012, The London Review of Books published a brief essay about fact-checking and U.S. publications' "schizophrenic obsession with facts."

At The London Review of Books,

Sources on reported pieces and characters in memoirs aren’t usually rung up to confirm what they’ve said, the way they are in New York...

[DesMoinesDem]

65. What more do you need? It's a known fact that the Obama administration misinformed the public

and the Guardian article shows you how, with all the quotes you need. What more could you possibly need?

[Blue_Tires]

52. Like I've been saying all week

Once Hersh retracts his long-debunked Syria story, then we'll have a chat about who's being "disgraceful"

[Jesus Malverde]

56. .

Jesus

[Blue_Tires]

61. Oh God please tell me you want to try and defend that bullshit

There's a reason why the New Yorker doesn't run his stories anymore...You do realized Hersh has been forced to write retractions before, or haven't you been paying attention??

Of course Hersh's "America the Great Satan" Narrative is like crack cocaine to the emoprogs and brogressives (regardless of whether it's even true or not) so it's no big surprise to see DU all of a sudden loves him again for the time being...

[Jesus Malverde]

99. Emoprogs and brogressives

Your funny.

[zentrum]

57. Seems more than possible, yet….

…..his recent history of insisting (really insisting) a few years ago that the US was going to attack Iran "in the fall", "next month", "by the end of the year"—that never materialized. He had "reliable sources" then too.

Will always admire and trust him for his work on Mei Lai and Abu Ghraib—he rescued history, and was one of the greatest reporters in the world, but I wonder if something has gone off the rails in recent years.

His way of handling questions about this Bin Laden story is just weird. When asked about skating on thin "sourcing ice" —he yells, "Who cares?". When questioned further he yells, "boo-boo!".

Regardless, the story needs not to be dismissed. Needs to be investigated and probed all the more by other reporters. Regardless of the result of this probe——he's once again done what a reporter should do—by doubting the official story.

We should never, ever, take the official story at face value.

[Jesus Malverde]

58. Good points..nt

[fadedrose]

63. Jesus, Jesus

Unnamed sources always get everyone's suspicions aroused. Seymour himself wouldn't accept another writer's stories when they depended on unnamed sources.

I heard the media asking questions of those who were close to the attacks and they were astonished to read Seymour's accounts.

They did ask questions, got the same information that the WH gave when it happened, and from the Seals who went in.

I don't like the assassination myself. I know they didn't want to make a martyr out of Ben Ladin or take him prisoner, but the whole thing rang true, but not American...it's not the way I think of my country, and while happy we got him it was with a tiny bit of chagrin. Main relief was not seeing any Seals die in the adventure.

[KingCharlemagne]

71. Bin Laden was extra-judicially executed. That's the America I know

and love.

[geek tragedy]

64. Just like the media was unfair to Judy Miller. nt

[mythology]

69. I think the media should also follow up on stories in the National Enquirer

There was follow up pointing out all of the holes in basic logic that Hersh glossed over. After that point, there really isn't much use continuing to beat the dead horse. Hersh provided no credible information as to why bin Laden would have been handed over in that time, nor any way to verify his claims. It's not worth following up on because it's almost certainly fantasy.

Hersh tossed a claim out that can't be proven based on what he put in the article. I don't blame the media for not wasting their time.

[heaven05]

73. Most of the responses on this thread

Last edited Sat May 16, 2015, 04:08 PM - Edit history (1)

are disgusting. binladen is dead. All this misinformation, dispersion, distraction and just plain CT is laughable, to say the least. Obama is one of the better Presidents we've had in a generation. He may be corporate, but no POTUS, not Warren, not Sanders would be able to not bow and or bend to the power corporations wield in this society's politics. Democrats buying into this hersh crap, despicable. Hersh has had his day and is TRYING to stay relevant and in the public eye, he now needs to be let out to pasture to live out his "golden years". I have experienced so many in the last six years that have lost their grip on reality, that call themselves 'progressives' and 'liberal'. I fear for this Party next year. Tin foil hats are going to be the cause of mass electrocution.

All you tin foil hatters are........

[DirkGently]

75. Well PART of it lines up with facts.

The question of whether / how much the Pakistani ISI knew about Bin Laden's whereabouts, and whether the U.S. got insider intel from it, rather than "tracking a courier" fits previous reporting. That both tracks with earlier reports and makes logical sense.

Other bits, like Bin Laden's body being "torn apart with rifle fire" and the suggestion no intel could have been recovered, based on a retired Intelligence pro saying Al Quaeda had been been seemingly inactive for years, sound like wild speculation. Bin Laden couldn't have had hard drives or documents just because Al Quaeda had been quiet for a while? The U.S. conducted a fake naval sea burial, staged by officers and crew? Bin Laden's body was reduced to literal bloody chunks like in a cartoon? That's all a bit much for purely anonymous sources.

Seymour has done amazing, important work in the past, but he's getting a little wild in his later years. He has claimed JFK had a "first wife" and that Bush was going strike Iran unilaterally. He pulled docs out of his "Dark Side of Camelot" book at the last second that turned out to be forgeries.

I think Hersh has a lot of great sources, and continues to get good chunks of truth out, but his recent work sometimes dips into gossip and overly creative speculation on the part of indirect, anonymous sources. He's not a "crank," but I take his newer work with a fair-sized chunk of salt.

[Thinkingabout]

78. Hersh disgraced himself, he did not check his sources well enough, but then he would not have

anything to write in his book. A journalist's reputation is in their ability to verify before reporting, he knows this. Also with other occasions of reporting and it did not occur.

[tritsofme]

79. If anything, the media gave his nonsense far too much airtime. Hersh is in truther/birther territory now

[nationalize the fed]

88. VIDEO: Reporter Seymour Hersh Discusses His Controversial Exposé on Killing of Osama bin Laden

Truthdig Posted on May 15, 2015

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh’s recent essay caused a political firestorm by repudiating almost everything we know about Osama bin Laden’s 2011 death.

In this interview with The Real News Network, Hersh dissects what he terms President Obama’s “fairy tale” narrative of the killing of the al-Qaida founder.

http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/video_seymour_hersh_discusses_controversial_bin_laden_expose_20150515

Seymour (Sy) Myron Hersh (born April 8, 1937) is an American Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist and author based in Washington, DC. He is a regular contributor to The New Yorker magazine on military and security matters. His work first gained worldwide recognition in 1969 for exposing the My Lai Massacre and its cover-up during the Vietnam War, for which he received the 1970 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting. He is a recipient of the 2004 George Orwell Award.

His 2004 reports on the US military's mistreatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison gained much attention. Hersh received the 2004 George Polk Award for Magazine Reporting given annually by Long Island University to honor contributions to journalistic integrity and investigative reporting. This was his fifth George Polk Award, the first one being a Special Award given to him in 1969
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Hersh

Transcript: http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=13859

[Jesus Malverde]

100. You go on to say truth doesn't matter as long as he's dead and then say truth hurts..

[Warren DeMontague]

102. No, I think both Hersh's "story" is bogus, but also people who think there "must be more" to the OBL

Killing are operating from some incredibly tone-deaf bubble, where they're still waiting for the groundswell of outrage that the guy was shot in the first place.


People think there are folks clamoring to "get to the bottom of" the Osama Bin Laden shooting- on what planet?

We saw it here on DU, at the time- people wondering where the outrage was, over "shooting a nice little old man, in his jammies".


I dunno. I saw those planes hit the builidngs. I saw people whose only crime was coming to work in the morning, with no choice but to jump to their certain deaths.

Like Dzohar Tsarnaev- fuck that guy.

Your other post, about how there had to be some mystery to the narrative because there are two different SEALs taking credit for the killing- look, man... No offense, but, there's no mystery. Whoever shot that guy is gonna get book deals, etc. it's not, actually, that hard to figure out.

[Jesus Malverde]

103. The whole Hersh outrage reminds me a lot of the vitriol poured on Gary Webb

In retrospect his story was well sourced and collaborated.

I personally dont care if they wacked him in a black site or at the compound. Some
People deserve their fate. I do care when the MSM rises up with vitriol and does little to refute the allegations other than heap scorn on the messenger. If there was no issue the story would have been ignored by the MSM. It was after all not front page material. The vitriol and scorn was.

[Warren DeMontague]

104. It's not the first dubious assertion to come from S. Hersh in the past 10 years.

There've been a few.

But I'm not super hung up on it either way... I suspect it's not so much vitriol coming from the MSM, as it is apathy. Beyond that, it's unclear how anyone could refute OR corroborate the allegations, so it is left where it is.