(This post is from our new blog: Unofficial Sources.)
R.J. Hillhouse, a former professor, Fulbright fellow and novelist whose writing on intelligence and military outsourcing has appeared in the Washington Post and New York Times, made the same main assertions in 2011 about the death of Osama bin Laden as Seymour Hersh’s new story in the London Review of Books — apparently based on different sources than those used by Hersh.
Bin Laden was killed by Navy SEALs on May 2, 2011. Three months later, on August 7, Hillhouse posted a story on her blog “The Spy Who Billed Me” stating that (1) the U.S. did not learn about bin Laden’s location from tracking an al Qaeda courier, but from a member of the Pakistani intelligence service who wanted to collect the $25 million reward the U.S. had offered for bin Laden; (2) Saudi Arabia was paying Pakistan to keep bin Laden under the equivalent of house arrest; (3) Pakistan was pressured by the U.S. to stand down its military to allow the U.S. raid to proceed unhindered; and (4) the U.S. had planned to claim that bin Laden had been killed in a drone strike in the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan, but was forced to abandon this when one of the Navy SEAL helicopters crashed.
Hersh’s article makes the same key claims about the bin Laden raid, with this description of his sources:
The major US source for the account that follows is a retired senior intelligence official who was knowledgeable about the initial intelligence about bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad. He also was privy to many aspects of the Seals’ training for the raid, and to the various after-action reports. Two other US sources, who had access to corroborating information, have been longtime consultants to the Special Operations Command.
Hillhouse’s post states that her information came from “Sources in the intelligence community.” In interviews today via telephone and email, she explained that the passage by Hersh “suggests that we did not share sources” because “to the best of my knowledge, my sources were not privy to aspects of the SEAL’s training raid … and they also did not consult for SOC.” In addition, Hillhouse said, “I would be shocked if … my sources would talk to [Hersh], given their politics and given the sensitivity that the administration had toward this story.”
Hillhouse wrote another post on August 11, 2011 with more detail, and her story was picked up by numerous papers outside the U.S., such as the New Zealand Herald.
At that point, according to Hillhouse, “my understanding was there was great concern with the security guys … Everything that I’ve written on national intelligence, [that] was the first time I ever had a [former] senior member of the intelligence community signal me to basically go black … I’ve never been waved off like I was signaled to [then].” Because of this, Hillhouse says, she destroyed her notes from her conversations with her sources.
Hillhouse also claims that one of her sources told her a particular detail that she did not include in 2011 because she could not confirm it: that the Navy SEALs threw bin Laden’s body out of the helicopter while traveling over the Hindu Kush mountains from Pakistan to Afghanistan. Hersh’s story includes an assertion from his main source that “during the helicopter flight back to Jalalabad, some body parts were tossed out over the Hindu Kush mountains.” While this seems bizarre in retrospect, it would be plausible if the SEALs had believed at the time that the Obama administration planned to say publicly that bin Laden had been killed in a drone strike.
Hillhouse believes that “Everything that [Hersh] has said has been spot on” but “You can’t help but notice that everything he is saying in the story, which is true, was first broken by me.”
Via email, Hersh stated: “I did hear from someone this morning that Ms. Hillhouse was tweeting about her knowledge of the bin Laden raid but my children have forbidden me to tweet (they live in terror of my so doing) or to go on twitter … or any social media for that matter.”
The Intercept cannot corroborate the reporting of either Hillhouse or Hersh, or their statements about the sources for their articles, nor can we rule out the possibility that Hersh’s sources based their beliefs on Hillhouse’s writing. In reporting that appears to back up major elements of that of Hillhouse and Hersh, NBC today asserted that a Pakistani intelligence officer “walk in” told the CIA about bin Laden’s location in the year before the raid on his compound.
Photo of Raelynn Hillhouse: Donna Hillhouse
Hersh’s interview with Slate is surreal, it reads like it is fake or a parody. Ultimately, it’s pretty hilarious and makes Hersh look like he’s lost it.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2015/05/seymour_hersh_interview_on_his_bin_laden_story_the_new_yorker_journalism.html
That’s a great interview. On Twitter we — including Glenn — were all loving it so much. Hersh just let his utter contempt for the toady interviewer get through.
About Andrea Mitchell Hersh oozes disdain and says something like: “that woman on NBC, whatshername, the one married to Alan Greenspan.”
LOLOLOL
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Strong push-back against Mr. Hersh’s article is only to be expected, lest the entire 9/11 house of cards comes tumbling down. A perfect storm that must never see the light of day. Thus Osama was murdered rather then allowed to stand trial.
Hillhouse was scared shitless and destroyed her notes. She doesn’t deserve too much credit, IMNTBHO.
Strong push-back against Mr. Hersh’s article is only to be expected, lest the entire 9/11 house of cards comes tumbling down. A perfect storm that must never see the light of day. Thus Osama was murdered rather then allowed to stand trial.
Hillhouse was scared shitless and destroyed her notes. She doesn’t deserve too much credit, IMNTBHO.
The conspiracy theorists in this thread are absolutely hilarious. Send your thoughts to Oliver Stone. He told me he’s looking for a “boffo” property.
There are a few commenters at TI off in the weeds of conspiracy theory idiocy, but they are a small minority. Most here are reasonable and rational.
Mona, for those of us who know what’s really going on you are making TI appear to be colluding with the intelligence agencies. To use one of your favorite phrases, ‘shame in you.’
I feel sorry for you, and your kids if you have them. I was raised in a home by people who believed in deranged conspiracy theories, entwined with their religious weirdness. Time spent with unreasonable, irrational individuals — in their milieu — can be mentally & emotionally unhealthy.
Fortunately, Glenn and others frequently ban or delete the comments expanding upon your ilk’s particular hobby horses. It reduces the crazy quotient dramatically.
Then by all means have Glenn snap to it and banish me. I don’t believe you have the relationship with him you think you do.
Ahhh, so that’s why you are so angry. Sorry you had such a tough upbringing. But your story doesn’t negate reality of my story.
That explains your anger. I’m sorry for your troubled childhood, but it has no bearing on the reality of my circumstances.
In part, absolutely. People who believe irrational things in the face of all reasonable argument to the contrary, and against lack of evidence, can do great harm to others. Especially to children if the have them.
I have embraced standards of evidence and reasonableness that were, I concede, a great help in deprogramming from lunacy in my family of origin. It has been a great advantage that I have done this.
You are, of course, free to preach all brand of crazy as you prefer, except that you are not entitled to saturate this platform with it.
Tut-tut goes the scold. By all means, have Glenn banish me if he so chooses. Go and ‘tell on me’ to get your wish. I feel sorry for you Mona — and I’m the one getting tortured.
“Conspiracy theorists, alien abductions, and implants…” That’ll work.
Americans would never torture dissidents, would they? It’s a free country.
The push back against Hersh needs to be super-intense, otherwise he may start asking why Bin Laden wasn’t taken alive and held for trial. Then the entire 9/11 house of cards would come crashing down: Bin Laden’s real connection to the Saudis and the CIA might have become public. Oh boy!
Hillhouse was quite clearly scared out of her wits and stopped cold, destroying her notes, etc. Sure she can have credit for what she did in 2011, but she wasn’t willing to risk much and really follow the story.
The WH and media is trying to turn Sy Hersh into another Dan Rather. Not gonna happen.
Illusion and spectacle from the top down:
http://www.amazon.com/Empire-Illusion-Literacy-Triumph-Spectacle/dp/1568586132
Actually x CIA Larry C Johnson published nearly the exact same story points about the OBL hit as MS Hillhouse in May to August 2 2011 in his blog noquarterusa.net. Her first story, repeating most of these points, appeared on Aug 11 well after his. Hersch adds many new points, deeper sources, and street cred.
Was the story of Saddam Hussein’s capture also fabricated? The narrative about the spiderhole/bunker/underground hideout was never persuasive to me, and the fact that the Beltway media showed millions of Americans imaginative representations, courtesy of the Pentagon and AP, of the crawl space, makes it all the more suspect.
see: http://www.counterpunch.org/2005/03/11/saddam-s-capture/
and this bullshit
Osama bin Laden dead: Blackout during raid on bin Laden compound | The head of the CIA admitted yesterday that there was no live video footage of the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound as further doubts emerged about the US version of events.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8493391/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Blackout-during-raid-on-bin-Laden-compound.html
see:
The bin Laden assassination and the lies of the “war on terror”
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/05/13/pers-m13.html
The fact that’s not in dispute is that Bin Laden was killed. How he was found and where he was disposed of is immaterial and clearly designed as misinformation to protect sources and possible location. This is nothing more than an ego fight between a reporter and an academic.
At least this is not another GOP attempt to disparage the successes of this president. Because this would be modus operandi for them and I would not put it past them to continue to attempt to do this!
The thing to do is start putting officials on the record. One by one, ask them point blank to confirm or deny the facts alleged by Sy Hersh. Ask some direct questions. Listen carefully to the answers. Do they bob and weave? Obfuscate or prevaricate?
Is the mains stream corporate media even interested in knowing the truth? Let alone reporting it
Wouldn’t it make more sense to first put Hersh’s sources on the record?
After that, I’m all for the Q&A with U.S. government officials.
No, it would not make more sense.
You do get that there are times when sources should absolutely be anonymous and their identities protected, right? This is one of those times. Hersh is right about that.
I don’t take issue with granting anonymity. However, this isn’t an existing intelligence officer whose livelihood could be at risk. It is a retired intelligence official. I don’t expect Hersh to out his source though.
I’ll give you this, Nate, you work hard for your money and I am sure your supervisors are pleased.
Let’s think this through: I’m hired by [who exactly!?] to disagree with journalist Seymour Hersh on The Intercept. And that makes sense how exactly?
You know you are in a bubble, insulated from the outside world when your immediate reaction to others’ criticism is to assume you’re surrounded by hired goons.
But since you are onto me, don’t be surprised if you hear a buzzing sound, reminiscent of a flying lawnmower, high in the sky above your head.
I find it hilarious that they brought out the big guns to respond to the Hersh story — in the form of Nate.
Sometimes they give me reason to think I actually have a chance…
Yep, and my cronies are coming after you next Stan. We need to study yer intelligent mind!!
@Nate
Next? Your cronies have been at it for more than a decade. Have you not already had enough time to study my admittedly middling intellect?
And was that another threat?
We haven’t quite automated the process yet. Still collecting your metadata and substantive content but your comments on The Intercept keep breaking our Bullshit Detectors. That’s expensive equipment Stan, the taxpayers will not be happy about these bills.
Yes, but don’t get mad at me! I told the bosses NOT to plant listening devices in your block of cheese. “It’s too delicious, Stan will surely find it!!” Ah, those rascals never listen (except to you. Right now.)
@Nate “Yes, but don’t get mad at me!” That reads like @suave: “That wasn’t me.”
Now, where were we… oh, yeah, the Hersh story. Got any more middling analysis on the subject, or are you done, preferring to mix more threats with talk of cheese?
This is end of discussion with Nate the Big Gun.
The Nate fuckwittery keeps rollin':
And:
Anyone who could ask those “questions,” and anyone who doesn’t know the obvious answers, has no business in this adult discussion.
That was only one question Mona, try to keep up.
Also, try actually articulating your thoughts instead of just around tossing insults. I know – I ask a lot…
Whether questions or assertions, your crap is just that: you are a pseudo-inquirer. Hence, when you say this:
You fail to grasp that I do not respect you or take your spewings seriously. Stating what you are, and characterizing your blather, is all I usually care to do — when I decide to address you at all.
Yep, I heard you the first time. You’re a broken record.
I care not about your lack of respect but don’t lie, you take my words seriously. Otherwise you wouldn’t so consistently respond. My responses obviously enrage you and make you say foolish things. You constantly badger my original posts while I utterly ignore yours (the only time I engage you is in situations like now where I address your responses to my posts).
That’s because you are utterly boring, predictable, non-skeptical, non-substantive, have no original thoughts and can’t even compensate for those shortcomings by throwing in some humor or wit. You let Glenn and others speak for you and then you tow the line by going on the defensive. You accuse others of being trolls in an attempt to invalidate their opinions (which according to tha Internetz makes you a “reverse troll.”)
Agreed. Name calling is clearly your modus operandi.
Meh, I usually ignore you. There are, however, always new arrivals so sometimes I reassert the facts of what you are and the shit you spew.
Osama Bin Laden Dead Since 2001 (Benazir Bhutto Says Osama Bin Laden Dead In 2007)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-2u1FBQ-Nk
might be interesting to overlay this w/ politicalcompass.org’s chart
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/121771/loneliness-sy-hersh
Carlotta Gall in the NYT Magazine says several of Sy Hersh’s claims “ring true.”
Rest: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/12/magazine/the-detail-in-seymour-hershs-bin-laden-story-that-rings-true.html
“How could so many people get away with lying don’t be ridiculous!”
They’re spooks, ffs. It’s literally their job to conspire.
@epmurph sums it up nicely
https://twitter.com/epmurph/status/598208671093493760
‘overton window’ for the deep state. subjects mindlessly regurgitate accusation to justify dissonance w/ system
Chris Hayes’ performance has been particularly brutal in this regard.
Sony bought the rights to the story from the US government. So while other versions may be interesting, theirs is the definitive one. Of course, they’ll eventually do a remake of Zero Dark Thirty, so the story will change again, since future audiences will want a new twist. But I don’t think paying a Pakistani informant will have much dramatic value, so I can’t see Hersh’s story ever gaining much traction. I would see something more along the lines of Osama being captured alive, the helicopter transporting him being hijacked by Russians, an intrepid CIA torturer travelling to Moscow, capturing Putin and torturing him until he reveals Osama’s new whereabouts, and then a secret night raid in Red Square where Osama is killed and given a Russian burial at sea. Or was that Snowden? I tend to get these stories mixed up.
Anyway, Sony is more than welcome to use that script, if they wish.
Sony has the rights to some version of the Snowden story, which alarms me, especially as Greenwald keeps downplaying the involvement. If they don’t call it Hero Dork Snoopy I’ll be disappointed, I can tell you.
I seem to have lost my taste for the satire of the comfortably untortured. I am sure I am not the only one.
I read Hersh’s whole account and I am very skeptical of this massive conspiracy that would involve so, so many people. Some things that stuck out for me:
* The three bodies in the Abbottabad compound. We saw the pictures, so if they are part of the scheme, did the ISI take these pictures elsewhere and provide them to Reuters or did ISI transport bodies to Abbottabad and then take pictures? If the latter, how did people living in the neighborhood not notice this? Reuters said they reviewed the photographs and did not see evidence of manipulation.
* Hersh says the Saudis were “financing bin Laden’s upkeep.” Allegedly the “Saudis didn’t want bin Laden’s presence revealed to us because he was a Saudi” (no shit, Sherlock) and he might “start talking to us about what the Saudis had been doing with al-Qaida.” The motive here is just odd. If Bin Laden had incriminating dirt on the Saudis, he had from 2001 to his supposed “capture” in 2006 to lay it out. Why wouldn’t he have done so in that time frame? He hated the Saudi government for expelling him from the country in the mid 1990s. Also, why wouldn’t the Saudis want Osama dead if that was the case? Oh right, the Pakistanis were allegedly using him for leverage against the Taliban and Al Qaeda, said the unnamed retired source. Right. Peter Bergen called this claim “risible” and rhetorically asked “Why would the Saudis pay for the upkeep of their most mortal enemy?
* The CIA vaccination claim. The claim had been that the Government tried but failed to get DNA from Bin Laden’s children to confirm Bin Laden was there. The CIA used a source – Dr. Afridi who went through the neighborhood offering vaccinations. But it failed. Hersh said the Pakistani doctor “made no attempt to obtain DNA from the residents in the bin Laden compound” and that the story was a cover for a different Pakistani doctor with ties to the military that DID obtain the evidence. There is absolutely no information on how he went about doing this. But according to Hersh, this doctor’s military relationship was a liability and therefore they framed Afridi. If the U.S. did intend to use Afridi to justify its DNA collection effort, why didn’t they lie and say it was a success? After all, according to Hersh, this was supposed to be providing cover for the other doctor’s successful DNA collection.
* Where is the supporting documents or any kind of proof? All we get is information from an anonymous retired official!?
* Vox raised a solid point regarding Hersh’s claim that the intelligence materials gathered at the compound were fake:
* Apparently Peter Bergen would also be in on the conspiracy (or another victim of it). Regarding Hersh’s claim that the only shots fired (aside from a stray bullet) were at OBL, Bergen said:
Stories about Reuters’ questionable news coverage & CIA relationship
Actions
E. C.
6:28 AM
To: rjhillhouse@gmail.com
Subject: Stories about Reuters’ questionable news coverage & CIA relationship
Just fyi.
Reuters Reports False Claims, But Ignores Flotilla Facts http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=36&x_article=1900
The Reuters Photo Scandal http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/
Reuters, favourite UK FCO/MI6 outlet, gears up its anti-Assange/Ecuador attack machine with false reporting https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/235412070072459266
Reuters’ Early Report Of Protesters At Libya Attack Raises Questions http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/15/reuters-libya-attack_n_1967494.html
Did Reuters file misleading Benghazi report?http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/did-reuters-file-misleading-benghazi-report/
Cuba accuses Reuters journalist of collaborating with CIA https://knightcenter.utexas.edu/blog/cuba-accuses-reuters-journalist-collaborating-cia
http://miamiherald.typepad.com/cuban_colada/2011/04/cuban-documentary-accuses-reuters-journalist-of-collaborating-with-cia-morning-roundup.html#storylink=misearch
Neoconservatism: a CIA Front? “The House report indicated that Reuters news service was frequently used for CIA disinformation…” http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3700.htm
‘Reuters lied’: MH17 witness says reporter falsified testimony:http://rt.com/news/245141-reuters-witness-misreport-mh17/
More false reporting about the Catholic Church…this time in Reuters http://andthechurch.com/2013/04/04/more-false-reporting-about-the-catholic-church-this-time-in-reuters/
Bombing of Funeral: False Reporting by Reutershttp://www.scam.com/showthread.php?t=15078
Reuters to be sued by PTA for false reporting http://www.moremag.pk/2014/04/22/reuters-to-be-sued-by-pta-for-false-reporting/
Reuters Admits Cropping Photos of Ship Clash, Denies Political Motive http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/06/08/reuters-fake-photos-ihh-gaza-blockade-commandos/
Actions
E. C.
5/10/15
To: sfpsych@gmail.com
Just fyi. Something to share with your colleagues in print?
Reuters Reports False Claims, But Ignores Flotilla Facts http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=36&x_article=1900
The Reuters Photo Scandal http://www.zombietime.com/reuters_photo_fraud/
Reuters, favourite UK FCO/MI6 outlet, gears up its anti-Assange/Ecuador attack machine with false reporting https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/235412070072459266
Reuters’ Early Report Of Protesters At Libya Attack Raises Questions http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/15/reuters-libya-attack_n_1967494.html
“massive conspiracy”
As far as conspiracies go, it wasn’t really all that massive. It was a backroom deal making between small numbers of high ranking elites and on the ground it was a classified military op carried out by service members who do that exact sort of thing with out asking questions. Getting the Pakistani military to cooperate is just part and parcel to the whole client state relationship.
The rest of it is all about who knew what and when did they know it; which can be hard to know definitively.
If Hersh’s story is true or mostly true — and there seem to be several corroborations now of at least the primary claim — those are indeed interesting questions. Why would the Saudis want to keep OBL a secret prisoner in complicity with Pakistan? Maybe there’s more here than we can imagine. Incidentally, Hillhouse herself raised some of the same questions back in 2011.
The Saudis probably hoped they could trade him to the US for a war on Iran. Maybe they did, and the US reneged. Or perhaps the US didn’t renege, and the war with Iran is still on, Yemen being the prelude.
LOL. I need some popcorn and 3d glasses
I was agreeing with you. If the Hersh premise is true, and Bin Laden had “incriminating dirt on the Saudis”, they could simply have killed him. So if they kept him alive, he presumably held some value in that state. His most obvious value was that the Americans wanted him, making him a useful bargaining chip. So what do you think the Saudis would have asked for? Presumably not money.
Of course, it’s also possible that Bin Laden had some powerful sponsors in the Saudi government who wanted to keep him alive for sentimental reasons. Or perhaps they feared his incriminating evidence was in the hands of his followers, who would release it if he were killed. Or maybe they weren’t actually financing his stay in Pakistan. Or perhaps he was never in Abbottabad in the first place. I’m open minded about such things. In the absence of evidence, anything is possible.
Although I suppose I shouldn’t encourage idle speculation. So in the absence of evidence, what the government tells you must be true.
It’s not that simple. For the narrative to be false, there would have to be a nearly endless number of liars and co-conspirators. Here’s a quick list:
* Every person in the now famous situation room photo: Obama, Biden, Hillary, Robert M. Gates, Brennan, Daley, Donilon, Mike Mullen, and other military officials; and Panetta who was relaying information.
* The seventy nine Navy Seals, including Seal Team 6, that got debriefed (Soruce: David Sanger, Confront and Conceal)
* The pilots of the Chinook from which a medic took bone marrow samples
* The NSA which captured al-Kuwait’s information and CIA operatives who followed him around Pakistan and analyzed satellite images of the compound.
* Michael Leiter and Stephen Kappes
* Al Qaeda and Taliban leadership (after all, they knew the Pakistanis were using OBL as a captive bargaining chip…) and OBL’s wife and family.
* Pakistan’s ISI who captured and held OBL and then fabricated photos of dead bodies in the compound.
* the Saudi Government which was “financing” the operation;
* Senior officials aboard the USS Carl Vison, the nuclear aircraft carrier where Hersh claims OBL was not taken.
* Pakistani General Ashfaq Kayani, ISI General Pasha, and the Pakistani military which Hersh claims let the US Special Forces enter their country knowingly. For Kayani, he would have made a conscious decision to either appear complicit in secretly hiding OBL from the U.S. or looking like an incompetent. Talk about a self-defeating decision.
* The Pakistani Parliament which issued the “Abbottabad Commission Report on Killing of OBL” [They might have to be the biggest suckers of all, if Hersh is correct]
* All the apparently sucker journalists such as CNN’s Peter Bergen who visited Abbottabad, and his sources; Mark Mazzetti and his sources;
* Dr. Afridi and his staff who ran the vaccination program;
This conspiracy could give 9/11 a run for its money! /s
The most credible claim seems to be that a source told the CIA in 2010 that Bin Laden was in Abbottabad. Carlotta Gall and some NBC correspondents had similar stories so it raises some questions.
But the truly explosive part of Hersh’s article is that the USG allegedly WORKED with the Pakistanis and Saudis to stage the assault and that the Saudis funded OBL’s stay for some unexplained reason. The evidence there is so scant and Gall seemed to punt on that part of Hersh’s article, explicitly questioning his claim that the US did not obtain a tranche of intelligence information from the compound.
There may be truth in some of Hersh’s claims but that doesn’t make the greater narrative true. He has to answer some questions.
You are a pseudo-inquirer as has been evident for a long time in Greenwald’s threads. I quoted Carlotta Gall at length above and linked to her significantly Hersh-supportive piece.
Nate is a “pseudo-inquirer.”
That’s one way of putting it. “Establishmentarian airhead” is how I’d say it, but you’re more polite.
Most amusing to me is Nate — NATE! — asserting that Sy Hersh “has to answer some questions.”
When I first got here Nate seemed interesting, and he certainly is intelligent with a peculiar appeal, but he’s evidently ultimately someone who just wants to find fault with The Intercept, which is sad.
As for Hersh, his reporting is impressive, and (as you imply) beyond pedestrian criticism. I’m still not convinced that bin Laden was there at all, however, but that’s either just me and my suspicious nature, or another story.
Mona, how do you manage to so consistently misinterpret my posts!? It really is stunning. My presumption is that you don’t read closely but get all riled up and miss key points.
I said: But the truly explosive part of Hersh’s article is that the USG allegedly WORKED with the Pakistanis and Saudis to stage the assault and that the Saudis funded OBL’s stay for some unexplained reason. The evidence there is so scant and Gall seemed to punt on that part of Hersh’s article
Gall said: I cannot confirm Hersh’s bolder claims — for example, that two of Pakistan’s top generals, Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the former army chief, and Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the director of the ISI, had advance knowledge of the raid. But I would not necessarily dismiss the claims immediately.
Gall CANNOT confirm it, but wouldn’t “necessary dismiss the claims immediately.” If you think that is significantly supportive, you are lost. Look at the title of the article: “The DETAIL in Seymour Hersh’s Bin Laden Story That Rings True.” That’s not an endorsement of the narrative but basically saying “this part may be true!”
As for the supposed out of bounds nature of criticizing Hersh, that was predictable. Your deification of Glenn makes it clear that you think some individuals are above being criticized by mere “pedestrians.”
Foreign Policy reached nearly the exact conclusion:
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/05/13/what-pakistan-knew-about-the-bin-laden-raid-seymour-hersh/?utm_content=buffer68951&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
I guess this Husain Haqqani journalist at FP must be some pedestrian critic also!!
Yet more Nate fuckwittery. The author almost certainly did not write the headline. I’ll stand by my lengthy quote of Gall and link above. And this:
LOL, is THAT your retort!? Blame the creator of the headline!!
The Tweet only makes you sound more foolish. Let me break this down for you:
The Tweet said Gall staunchy defends #SyHersh contention Pak/ISI was “holding”Bin Laden&when found out MAY HAVE MADE DEAL ON RAID.
Operative words being that Pak/ISI “may have made a deal on the raid.” But Gall said in her article: “I CANNOT CONFIRM Hersh’s bolder claims — for example, that two of Pakistan’s top generals, Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the former army chief, and Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the director of the ISI, HAD ADVANCE KNOWLEDGE OF THE RAID.”
So piecing this together, how does (as the Tweet says) “Gall defend the contention that Pak/ISI ‘made [a] deal on a raid’ when Carlotta herself said she Cannot Confirm that the top officials – Kayani and Pahsa – “had advance knowledge of the raid”? It doesn’t make sense unless there is some rogue Pak/ISI elements that nobody has yet discussed.
As for the other aspect of the Tweet, the “holding Bin Laden” aspect, it was so shoddy that Gall did not even report it:
Mona, you are so hopelessly lost on this topic, it’s not even funny.
Nate, it can only enhance my credibility among intelligent people of good faith when you issue such droppings.
Case in point. Hersh claimed no such thing. His source said the chain of custody was bogus. Nothing about “fake”. Fisher filled the blanks from his own blank head.
That does not match up with Hersh’s story. He said:
He may not have used the word “fake” but the word “hoax” is a synonym.
You’re reading it wrong, and it’s not that hard. Hersh is saying every story they have created is a hoax, including the “treasure trove” story. He’s not saying the materials recovered were fake.
Jose you’re either genuinely confused or parsing words. If you are interpreting my comment as the U.S. recovered fake documents from the compound, that is incorrect. What I am saying is that Hersh says the whole treasure trove story is fake, meaning that allegedly the U.S. either recovered little or nothing, or recovered items but fabricated the contents.
If your understanding is the latter, please read on. If the former, you misunderstood me.
To start, how can the “treasure trove” story be a HOAX unless the materials recovered weren’t what the government said they were? To be a hoax, the contents of the trove would have to be fabricated, i.e. “faked” or have not existed in the first place.
Vox’s viewpoint is supported by the following:
(1) Carlotta Gall: “Hersh’s claim that there was LITTLE or NO treasure trove of evidence retrieved from Bin Laden’s home rings less true to me.”
(2) Politico describes it as such: “The treasure trove of intelligence reaped by the SEALs from the shot-up Abbottabad compound? The collection of bin Laden DNA evidence? Another cover story.”
(3) Aron Lund of the Carnegie Endowment: “PT: Hersh says the Abbottabad docs released via CTC West Point are fake. He has to, since they contradict they idea that OBL was a prisoner”
https://twitter.com/aron_ld/status/597559593045250048
(4) Christian Science Monitor: “The alleged vast array of useful documents obtained from bin Laden’s compound, and fed into the US intelligence analysis system since? They must all be FAKES – since bin Laden is said to have been under complete Pakistani control since 2005.”
(5) New York Times: “One example is Mr. Hersh’s claim, based on anonymous sources, that administration officials were LYING when they said the SEAL team recovered a trove of intelligence from Bin Laden’s compound. If he is right, that means the United States knowingly allowed an F.B.I. agent to perjure himself at a federal trial of a member of Al Qaeda in New York in February. In his testimony, the agent described in detail how he received computers, hard drives, documents and other material from the SEAL team members immediately after they landed at a base in Afghanistan. He then spent 17 hours cataloging the material before it was put on a plane back to the United States. The detail, if MANUFACTURED, is stunning: The agent, Alexander Otte, listed the types of materials he had received, including the size of some of the digital storage devices recovered (a two-gigabyte micro-SD card, a four-gigabyte thumb drive), and even the brands of the devices (Sony and Kingston).
(6) Quartz: In Hersh’s telling, president Barack Obama then went on TV and LIED to the world about the circumstances of the raid, the burial at sea, and the haul of documents.
(7) Slate: “…That the raid had been carried out with Pakistan’s cooperation after the Americans found out about the al-Qaida leader’s location, and that the documents seized from his compound were FABRICATED in order to make him appear to have been active up until his death.”
For the chain of custody. The original claim was a treasure trove of operational material, with Bin Laden at the helm. Hersh:
Nothing you typed has ANYTHING to do with “chain of custody” so I have no clue what the hell you are talking about.
But since you’re now moving the discussion towards the “operational material,” I’m game. It is quite simple to cast doubt upon as we have access to the CTC document guide. Here’s what they say:
Report, section “SOCOM-2012-0000019″
Also in the same report:
In SOCOM-2012-0000010,
SOCOM-2012-0000015
SOCOM-2012-0000016
But NOOOOO, this has nothing to do with operational plans. But it matters not, since the “retired official” from Hersh’s article “disputed the authenticity of the West Point materials” and said “There is no linkage between these documents and the counterterrorism centre at the agency.” hence, we are back to square one about where Hersh claims that the intelligence information is fake.
BenjaminAP, are you deliberately obtuse, yes?
I apologize, maybe you aren’t deliberately obtuse. You exhibit a pattern, but everyone has different levels of reading comprehension, I shouldn’t be so quick to judge. Let’s try again.
Chain of custody. Savvy?
And if it was genuinely operational, “no agency professional would support this fairy tale”. This shouldn’t be confusing. Nothing about “fake”. Credulous hacks in the media used this frame to support their confirmation bias.
I read Hersh’s whole account and I am very skeptical of this massive conspiracy that would involve so, so many people.
Since when did Americans become so, so difficult to fool?
The Hearst papers fooled them about the USS Maine, LBJ fooled them about the Gulf of Tonkin “attack”, Reagan had them believing Sandinistas were going to invade Texas, W fooled them (W!) about Saddam and OBL being bosom buddies, and Sadam’s WMD — not the actual WMD found containing poisons from S. Carolina.
Nate, so, so many of you are professional liars, and that is going to be what trips you up; it is hard enough for one person to keep her lies straight, 24×7.
Stan, your posts always touch my heart! Found those listening devices hidden in the blocks of cheese yet?
So THAT’S where they’re hidden. I was pretty sure it was those 11 coax cables running from underneath the Fannie Mae owned unit running into my nearby walls.
and of course the enron guys, the ponzi scheme guy, etc.,.
I think you meant , retired in some tropical paradise with umbrellas in the drinks…along with Saddam and everyone else whose doubles we publicly eliminated.
Brig Usman Khalid informed CIA of Osama’s presence in Abbottabad
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-2-317717-Brig-Usman-Khalid-informed-CIA-of-Osamas-presence-in-Abbottabad
On this day, I was validated.
I said all along; The killing of Bin Laden was an assasination, not a KIA.
The Obama administration and the U.S. navy seals are guilty of war crimes -specifically the killing an unarmed man when they could have taken him live.
It almost seems funny in retrospective all the lies that were spewed out of the mouths of the Administration & its soldiers.
Just a few to remember:
Armed with an automatic weapon, the al-Qaeda leader’s last act was to force his young bride to sacrifice her life as he tried to fire back at the US Navy Seals storming the compound.
The US has offered differing accounts of the killing of Bin Laden. Originally, officials said the al-Qaeda chief had “participated” in a firefight when he was shot dead.
5/3/11
On Tuesday 5/3, the White House corrected this, saying Bin Laden was unarmed. But it still insisted that he was resisting capture – although it is unclear exactly how he did so.
-reuters.com 5/6/2011
Pakistani security officials say neither bin Laden nor his comrades offered any resistance during the raid.
Another security official on Thursday said their killing was “cold-blooded.”
“There was a contingency plan to take OBL into custody” -Leon Panetta
Two specialist teams were on standby, probably on the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson in the Arabian Sea: one to bury Bin Laden if he was killed, and a second team of lawyers, interrogators and translators if he was taken alive
“Their instructions were to avoid any confrontation if at all possible. But if they had to return fire to get out, they were authorised to do it,” one senior Obama administration official is quoted by the New York Times as saying.
3/21/12 -cbs news
There are new details this morning of the raid that killed Osama Bin Laden.
And it says Navy Seals had only one objective the whole time: “To kill Bin Laden.”
The New Yorker magazine quotes an unnamed military officer as saying. “There was never any question of trying to capture Bin Laden.” Saying “no one wanted detainees”
White House officials have insisted -that capture was an option.
US officials have suggested that Bin Laden may have been reaching for a weapon, and that the Navy Seals may have suspected that people in the compound were wearing suicide belts.
July 15, 2011 http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20079778-503543.html?tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea
Osama bin Laden died at the hands of U.S. Navy SEALs in May, his terror wish list reportedly included attacking the United States on the upcoming 10th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks and shooting down President Obama’s helicopter or plane while the president was in the air. A U.S. official confirmed to CBS News correspondent Bob Orr.
October 7, 2011 http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20117092-503543.html?tag=cbsnewsMainColumnArea (Regarding the repatriation of Osama bin Laden’s three wives and their children)
Pakistani government officials have said in the past that one important aspect of the arrangements for repatriation will be to ensure that neither bin Laden’s wives nor his children have the opportunity to speak out to the media once they return to their native lands…
“These people are the only eyewitnesses to the raid on bin Laden’s home. I think there is an understanding between Pakistan and the United States that these people do not put out distorted accounts that could only stir up popular anger,” a Pakistani government official, who also spoke to CBS News on condition of anonymity, said in September.
Officials said bin Laden’s body, which was in U.S. custody, was given a sea burial.
Afterwards the body was being buried at sea. US officials said this was to avoid his grave becoming a shrine.
Sept 27, 2011
…his burial at sea from the USS Carl Vinson, Bennett said. -John Bennett, director of the CIA’s National Clandestine Service
May 02, 2011: Obama, describing that mission only briefly, he said its result “is a testament to the greatness of our country.”
The president traced the death of bin Laden to a tip received last August. He said he was briefed at the time on the “possible lead,” and that after months of intelligence work it was determined bin Laden was hiding in a compound “deep” inside Pakistan .
5/9/2011
The president’s spokesman suggested the initial confusion was the result of trying to provide a great deal of information in haste. But the shifting narrative will encourage those who doubt the official version of events.
and what of this?
2010 – Project Censored – #16 No Hard Evidence Connecting Bin Laden to 9/11
http://www.projectcensored.org/16-no-hard-evidence-connecting-bin-laden-to-9-11/
and see:
Seymour Hersh exposes official lies about Bin Laden killing
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/05/12/binl-m12.html
and as Vijay Prashad reminds us, in 2011 Tariq Ali had raised many questions about the Official Stories.
It’s a Conspiracy! How to [feebly attempt to] Discredit Seymour Hersh
http://www.thenation.com/blog/207001/its-conspiracy-how-discredit-seymour-hersh
Also, fuck Max Fisher.
Vivek Jain, you are one of my favorite commenters.
i guess there’s no possibility of some casual plagiarism going on is there? so a vast conspiracy and cover up was perpetrated, like the truthers claim about 9/11, and only a couple of retired or otherwise undisclosed sources know the truth, right? sometimes things are for the most part what they seem to be as reported at the time.
See, here’s why your moniker fits like a glove: “only a couple of retired or otherwise undisclosed sources know the truth, right?”
No, Nubwaxer. Many know the truth. Only a couple within the administration are willing to admit it.
Have you noticed the narrative that’s emerged in online comments? It goes something like this: Who cares who knew what? Obama got bin Laden, and that’s all that matters.
Right, cover-ups and propagandistic deception of the public are unimportant footnotes.
Actually most people would really like to know whether the President lied to us or the spooks lied to the President.
Given the USG’s track record, should that really matter? And since when has reporting what most people [sic] wanted to know been a journalist’s responsibility?
And please, continue to ignore the fact OBL was on the USG payroll in the eighties, and please, please do not investigate the possibility USG aid to PK’s ISI helped pay OBL’s rent in Abbotabad.
Who cares who knew what is always the best policy.
Defense mechanism, imo.
https://tinyurl.com/n59tr6b
interesting comparison here between Hersh and Hillhouse’s reporting on Saud
https://tinyurl.com/lw7jbh3
Compared to Hersh, almost in passing:
Hersh’s line stinks to high hell. What the Saudi’s “had been doing with Al Qaeda” isn’t a mystery. It’s classified. 28 pages in the 9/11 report, for starters.
Of course there are those who say that OBL died much much earlier (circa 2001 .. 2005), and the US kept the legend alive to take control of events. But I couldn’t possibly say. But it would make sense that if he truly was alive then it had to be the Pakistan SIS who looked after him all these years.
Well if, US officials got assistance from upper-level Pakistani officials, according to Hersh. And moreover, bin Laden wasn’t really “hiding” in Pakistan when Navy Seals found him as the US government claimed. Then, what about that Pakistani doctor Shakeel Afridi, who was accused spying for the United States and of helping the CIA track down Osama bin Laden? He was fined $3,500 and sentenced to 33 years in prison for treason by a tribal court in May of 2012, for identifying bin Laden’s family members through DNA taken during vacinations. Boy! those Pakistani officials must have really played him for a patsy, left him “flapping in the wind” used him as a scapegoat, and “threw him under the bus!” And whats worse, it looks like the US officials were complicit in framing the poor doctor as the fall guy for those corrupt Pakistanis.
Interestingly, Hillman makes the claim that waterboarding “works.” I guess that depends on your definition of “works.”
I never believed OBL was killed during that 2011 supposed raid for the following reasons-
No discussion of any kidney dialysis equipment as an “identifier” that OBL lived/used the Abottobad compound.
OBL was supposedly captured after a senior Taliban member was paid $25 M to arrange a meeting with OBL back in November of 2001.
Clapper lied to you, me, everyone with no punishment of ANY kind. Proving a culture of deception.
How could our military push into a sovereign nation as far as they did and it not be an act of war no matter who they were after?
Building 7 in the World Trade Center complex?
That list could get very long indeed.
We just passed the twenty year anniversary of the bombing of the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City. If you haven’t yet checked out the questions, anomalies and extremely dubious shit in this particular chapter of the ongoing fairy tale called ‘accepted history’, then I recommend watching the film, ‘A Noble Lie’. It was surely a prelude to our current era.
Alternatively there is this recent and shorter summary (1hour) from J Corbett:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vgfi1QZILxk
Don’t forget, the body was dumped in the ocean. Why?
Nobody is disputing that he was killed during the raid. LOL.
I’m not against the Government shooting Osama bin Ladin, whether he was an “unarmed cripple” or not. Osama declared jihad on the US and attacked US embassies and a US warship. He was a legitimate target. I probably would have done the same, if it was my job anyway. This was better than a drone attack at any rate.
The gratuitous lying by the US is annoying. This is just the latest in a long string of gratuitous lies.
1. Ukraine
2. TPP
3. Some other Lie
4. Your Favorite Lie Here
Speaking of deceptions, how about an update on MH17 airliner. We are coming up on the one year anniversary. There is supposed to be some ugliness going on there.
Si1ver1ock:
OBL was Washington’s boy. The US-based capitalist class has declared jihad on the world (including on the American public). The 1% considers the 99% to be legitimate targets for deprivation and starvation, and attacks on democratic, environmental, and economic rights.
Don’t get it twisted.
They also torture dissidents, but covertly, because it is a free country.
Stan, how specifically are you being tortured? You’ve mentioned stalking but that is different from torture.
I answered that question on May 7, as you know, and TI deleted the post; therefore no link. Cute. I can see why you wanted to avoid meeting me in person. Previously, you wrote of being “burned”, but now seem skeptical of your own torture claims.
In brief, I answer again: carefully staged death-threats, a physical assault in a medical lab, and threatening behavior with a straight razor (combined with a poke in the eye with scissors) — all mixed into the dozen+ years of Zersetszung — the childish stalking behavior plus financial, medical, and employment interference.
Stasi: it was nice traveling with you from Brazil to CA between May 10 and May 12, but you seem quite irritated and hyper-active today. Why did you send Israelis to put on a skit for me at Starbucks this morning? What gives? Why am I so threatening to you?
If the main stream media is saying that the story isn’t true, than it probably is. The Obama administration has never been able to keep their stories straight on how they found, killed and disposed of Bin Ladin’s body.
I was listening to a recording of a Hayden associate in the ASU Digital Repository, Roy Elson being debriefed for posterity, and he said he was boffing Horseface’s wife without knowing she was married to the Detroit Purple Gang. She was known as “The Body.” His own Nevada FBI chief brother didn’t know her profile when she walked passed the two in the airport? Was he gay, too? Guess Pete never had the need to make use of that honey trapped sap. Roy figured it out reading the paper generated by the Arizona Project. Most say that’s derivative, too. Yet most say they’ve never heard of any of it, either.
There were always a number of very odd elements to the Bin Laden raid. The first was that he had been holed up in a compound in Abbottabad, for 5[+?] years, unbeknown to the Pakistani army or ISI. That was curious to say the least, Abbottabad is not some poky outpost.
The second is that the US could conduct a raid on the compound without informing anyone in Pakistan. Again, this is Abbottabad; as good as the Seals are, the idea they could safely arrive there and get out without at least some cooperation from the Pakistani Army, which has a huge presence there, was curious.
The third element is that the line from both the American and Pakistani governments, that the latter was not advised in advance of the raid, was way too convenient for all parties.
Fourthly, the idea that the Seals recovered a huge cache of intelligence from the compound seemed odd. Even if Bin Laden avidly recorded all his work, the raid, which had to occur at lightning speed… it seemed implausible that they would leave with much more than a notebook/laptop/cell-phone.
In case anyone is confused, I fully believe Seal Team 6 conducted this raid, and that they killed Bin Laden in the course of it. The official narrative around the raid, however, is what is being questioned, and in my opinion, needs to be. You figure it will take someone like Sy Hersh to do it, and his reporting with heavy use of anonymous sources, is completely in line with how he has uncovered other stories – everything from My Lai to abuses at Gitmo and Abu Ghraib.
I fully expect people questioning the official narrative to be smeared as Bin Laden truthers, but the official narrative has always had some credibility issues with it. And at the very least, here we have a more plausible alternative theory, something that might get closer to the truth.
“…it seemed implausible that they would leave with much more than a notebook/laptop/cell-phone.”
Also recall that Hersh’s source(s) say there were no computers found at the site.
The timing of the announcement was the most suspicious thing to me, choreographed to align perfectly with Obama’s national TV audience.
The fact the Obama admin milked this for maximum publicity? Nothing terribly surprising there.
I can also understand a delay of a day or two on the announcement. What’s more germane to the story is why the raid happened in April 2011. Bin Laden’s presence in Abbottabad would have been known for a while, so maybe it was the precise moment that American spies/diplomats thought they finally had the deal and cover story agreed? I really don’t know, but there must have been a lobby within the national security community that the raid had to be done then, that there could be no further delay.
You mean “Gumby” outpost, Pokey is offended.
The link to the NBC story provided in the story has them already trying to protect the WH: “The new revelations do not necessarily cast doubt on the overall narrative that the White House began circulating within hours of the May 2011 operation.”
Given the sensationalism of the story and the credibility of the authors, at least this story will get looked at seriously by others. If there is indeed a large conspiracy, then we should see some insiders coming clean.
Hillinghouse has resurrected her blogging skills to call out Hersch for ‘copying’ here story.
No idea how founded the complaint is, but Hersch’s version has a heck of a lot more meat to it. So he deserves credit too. I suspect that even had he read Hillinghouse’s story previously, he has probably sought out alternative sources for corroboration.
Fascinating stories either way, and they sound far more plausible than the changing eyebrow-raising narratives that we have heard previously.
The most troubling aspect is that American journalistsare reported to be in fear of their lives, from their own government – or the secret one that is the real power now.
I.F. Stone’s observation that all governments lie appears to be just the beginning.
And the U.S. gov is sitting on a whopper. Many journalists know, but no one will touch the story.
NBC is running cover for the administration on this. While they’ve corroborated a part of it, the walk-in, they are pushing back on the rest. Andrea Mitchell says she ‘trusts her sources’, naming for example CIA’s Mike Morrell as one of them (insert smirk here)
Wonder if we can get Seymour to tackle it. Anybody know how to reach him?
Anon, can you be more explicit? NameWithheld speaks of specific allegations. Are yours similar? Who among media know? Do you anticipate its release soon?
Many journalists know, but no one will touch the story.
Studies have shown that journalists in free countries have more integrity and courage than journalists in non-free countries.
https://twitter.com/billmon1/status/597929503923564544
The clock works.
It’s not just the spin doctors I suppose. This reflex seems practically unconscious. It’ll be interesting to see Jon Stewart’s angle, for example. I bet you 20 donuts it’s too cool for school.
If you feel like throwing up (and who doesn’t), go back and watch his performance during the blood ritual. “We’re back, baby!”
Now the spooks have to break it to Obama that what they told him to say was not the truth.
Plus NBC has other sources that corroborate these new versions. Time to grab some popcorn. Stern White House denials are not looking good, and neither is Peter Bergen, who might have just been played for a fool.
Why doesn’t somebody go and interview the wives and children of Osama bin Laden? Ex-president Musharraf is a rich man now, did he collect all the reward?
Everyone needs to archive all the commentary making fun of Hersh’s article so that they can’t try to make them disappear.
The problem with this story and Hersh’s story is that they both rely on “some guy said” reporting without any concrete evidence. That two reporters got the same story from supposedly different sources adds a tiny bit of credibility, but not a huge amount.It could be a concerted disinformation campaign by unknown parties. It’s still “some guys said” journalism and not true investigative reporting because there is no real evidence presented.
I should add that any reporting that starts with “The US Government said” should be treated with equal skepticism without corroborating evidence, which apparently is in short supply in regards to their version of the OBL kill operation.
By that logic perhaps bin Laden wasn’t there at all. This is possible, admittedly.
All evidence points to the fact that Navy SEALs cowardly assassinated an unarmed cripple, and note that DNA tests were apparently conducted after the kill – meaning they might have ‘bravely’ shot the wrong unarmed cripple and wanted to be sure it was the right unarmed cripple. Yay, Obama!
If you go strictly by the evidence presented, the entire story of OBL being killed could be a fabrication. I know of no concrete evidence presented by the US. There are some stories by a few Seals.
But it seems that perhaps:
1.OBL was killed.
2.The US conducted a Special Forces operation from Afghanistan into Pakistan that landed at Abottobad compound
3.The rest is very muddy
4. That the US fabricates a cover story to protect the identity of the informant who walked in is highly plausible.
5. They could have also tracked the courier concurrently. Not mutually exclusive.
6.Highly probable that SOME ISI operatives knew whereabouts of OBL.
7. Saudi connection seems improbable.
8. Highly improbable that Pakistan cooperated with US on operation. Otherwise why the fracture in relations?
I’m inclined to think the whole thing is made up, personally (the murderous – possibly “asset” – fuck was already dead long ago). But if it wasn’t, they cowardly killed an unarmed cripple merely *hoping* it was bin Laden and pretended the character was still relevant. Either way, the US establishment is full of it and wretchedly, miserably disgusting. And Navy SEALS should come out saying they don’t do this shit! I’ve known two, exceptionally capable and honorable, and they wouldn’t behave in any of the ways described by the govt or Hersh.
They sent the Seals in to shoot at something.
There is far more work put in than that. Hersh’s article took considerable time and he began it just weeks after the raid.
Some guy also told them where to find Bin Laden in the first place and they went ahead and sent in a Seal team to kill him.
Most national security reporting is “some guy said” reporting. In a lot of cases, anonymity is granted when it shouldn’t be.
It is understandable to question investigative reporting that is done based on unnamed sources. The difference here, however, is that Hersh has had a reputation of excellent reporting based precisely on unnamed sources, from the My Lai reporting until his very recent reports. And those stories have all been proven correct and accurate, not to mention explosive.
Obama shot an unarmed cripple! Well, SEALs shot an unarmed cripple, and Obama took credit for it!
Both Obama and Navy SEALS are wretched cowards. Hell of a thing to say, but there’s evidence for it. A fair amount of evidence, it seems.
If your statements weren’t so pathetically true, your observations would be hysterical.
Although, the fact that I see humor in this is disturbing. Perhaps I am crossing that fine line of sanity in maintaining emotional control and appropriate affect under times of great duress.
Here is an article which I think that you might appreciate:
“The Emperor’s New Clothes: The Naked Truth About the American Police State”
https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/the_emperors_new_clothes_the_naked_truth_about_the_american_police_state
Coincidentally, Washingtons Blog started running a 7 part series article on 7 May 2015 expounding on John Whitehead’s theme.
Link to Part 1 will follow:
“Seizing an alternative: Recognizing ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’ as THE STORY of today (1 of 7)”
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/05/seizing-an-alternative-recognizing-the-emperors-new-clothes-as-the-story-of-today-1-of-7.html
I think that maybe journalists and American Citizens should just quit pretending that “The Emperor” (United States of America) is wearing clothing.
Just collectively acknowledge that we know that the U.S. Federal Government is running amok around the world —-butt-ass naked; and that We the Masses of International People don’t find the display particularly attractive.
I’ve certainly had it up to here with looking at the establishment’s hideous “But…”
Yeah…it is epic in it’s grossly malformed configuration and those idiot puppet politicians in Washington D.C. are nodding approval of the “new clothes” while international masses of people are gagging at the spectacle.
“Have you noticed our logo has a giant octopus engulfing the globe?”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VImnpErdDzA
Personally I would not call SEALS wretched cowards. These men and women are always putting their lives on the line for their country every day for very little money. Let’s all remember too that that “unarmed cripple” was the mastermind of killing over 3,000 UNARMED Americans on 9/11.
It was my understanding that when you can’t corroborate what unnamed sources claim, you are no longer in the realm of journalism.
Now, I wouldn’t put an organized deception past the politicians and generals supposedly involved, nor doubt that the Saudis and Pakistanis would act as claimed, but I can’t help but consider that an agenda is being pursued by those advancing this story… and that it may well be even less palatable than the potential organized deception.
America using OBL to advance a seriously effed up agenda is a certainty… beyond that I’m not sure if either version of the story qualifies as truth, and I’d frankly prefer to keep the focus on the certainty because it continues to cause damage to our nation beyond the misallocation of taxpayer money, the concept of justice, and the death and destruction at home and abroad.
translation of altohone: “I refuse to believe anything that challenges the White House narrative because my skepticism is reserved for only journalists who question that narrative”
BS mistranslation that ignores the clear context of my comment.
What part of my criticism of the ongoing War of Terror being continued by Bush the Third (aka Obama) did you miss?
A little bit of skepticism about unnamed sources was one of the lessons that Aluminum Tube Cheney and Mushroom Cloud Condi should have taught us all via the New York Uncorroborated Times.
Belief without substantiation is faith, not fact.
Um, have you ever read Seymour Hirsch? He’s widely considered to have the deepest contacts in the military/intelligence community and has for 40 years. Hirsch NEVER names his sources. Because if he named his sources their careers would end in a nanosecond and quite possibly their lives just as soon. But there is no one who doubts the veracity of his sources. Because with the passage of time they almost always prove to have been correct.
Corroboration doesn’t necessitate naming names. But assertions (even from multiple sources) don’t amount to facts or evidence either.
But to address your tangent…
“there is no one who doubts the veracity of his sources”
Sure… except… I just did exactly that.
If you think nobody would use his good name for their own ends, I’m not sure I can help you.
But if you read my comment again, you may notice the “I wouldn’t put it past them” part that implies that Hirsch may in fact be correct, and my use of the word “consider” which makes clear that I’m raising a possibility, not making an assertion.
“they almost always prove to have been correct”
Almost huh?
What a reassuring choice of words.
There’s something desperate about the denials.
The more the white house and CIA protest and deny this story, the more they confirm its veracity. It makes a tremendous amount of sense from a number of viewpoints. Take, as the most trivial and blatant example, the fairy tale about bin Laden being buried at sea. There was no video of the burial, no photographs of the body, and no evidence in the Vinson’s logs. Why would that be, if in fact the WH’s story were true? What reason could they possibly have to prevent journalists from having access to that information? The answer, quite simply, is that there is no reason, no national interest is served by it.
We have seen, since September 2001, a continuous and well orchestrated campaign to promote fear and paranoia among the US population, by both wings of the Party, enthusiastically supported by the military and intelligence communities and their many contractors, all of whom recognize terrorism as a golden opportunity to justify their feeding at the public trough, a god-sent replacement for the Soviet Union. (And now, their greed has gotten the better of them, for they are trying to reinvent the USSR in the guise of Putin’s Russia, to rekindle the cold war. After all, it does not make much sense to have thousands of nuclear weapons and all their associated launch vehicles if your only enemy is a bunch of folks wearing explosive underwear.)
From that day I’ve always suspected that bin Laden is in some subbasement 45 levels below Diego Garcia, enjoying a never-ending session of something much worse than “enhanced interrogation” (and hence not reportable to Congress in disclosures of that program). I really should remember to write a sternly worded letter to my Congressman about that someday…