Sy Hersh: Old, Cranky and Spot On
The famed and legendary investigative journalist Seymour M. Hersh has just done what he has been doing for the past four decades -- given us a view of the world that runs counter to both the official government story and the version told to the American public by the mainstream press. And, not surprisingly, both the government and the press are bashing him.
The 78-year-old Hersh has not created such a controversy with an exposé like his most recent one about the death of Osama bin Laden since the Abu Ghraib prison torture scandal hit world-wide front pages in 2004.
When he revealed Abu Ghraib, and for many years after, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld were his targets. And he hit them hard and repeatedly. Bush called him a liar; Rumsfeld, an old friend, stopped returning calls; Cheney just snarled. But there was not much to do about Sy Hersh because, mostly, he got the story and his facts right.
Hersh's alternative view of the multiple wars in the Middle East and the U.S. war on terrorism -- seen mostly in the pages of his long New Yorker dispatches -- is a candid and well reported account of screw-ups and cover-ups. And much of it was ignored by the mainstream media.
The government tried its best -- as have presidential administrations dating back to Lyndon Johnson -- to undermine Hersh's account of the Mideast. He is an untrustworthy lefty. He has gone off the deep end and is losing his marbles. He uses these anonymous sources who nobody knows and he just cannot be trusted.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-miraldi/sy-hersh-old-cranky-and-s_b_7307724.html
Nitram
(22,781 posts)But triangulating all the various news releases and articles, plus what I know about how the intelligence services work, I'd say Sy got some parts right and others wrong. My best guess:
1. The walk-in story may be correct. And it is standard procedure to concoct a cover story to hide something like that. And it's nice to hear that torture played no part in the success of this operation.
2. I suspect Pakistan's secret service knew where bin Laden was. Better to have him where they can keep an eye on him. They may even have placed him under house arrest in the compound - likely given its location.
2. I suspect the orders were to kill bin Laden, not even try to capture him. Again, a cover story that bin Laden went for a gun would be standard practice.
3. I doubt Sy's contention that there was no intelligence gathered.
4. I doubt that Pakistan knew of the raid in advance.
Bottom line, we killed Osama bin Laden, mission accomplished.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)I think everyone has assumed that the ISI was hiding him, and there probably was some kind of tip off that they should watch that house. And no doubt they didn't go in there ready to Mirandize anyone.
On the Road
(20,783 posts)what were Obama, Clinton, and all the others in the room looking at according to Hersh?
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Or is that something we're not supposed to remember?