←back to thread

688 points hunglee2 | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.567s | source
Show context
mmastrac ◴[] No.34713024[source]
It's a great story, but it's all unsourced and could be a decent Tom Clancy story at best. You could probably write a similar one with Russia or German agents as the key players and be just as convincing.

The only anchor in reality appears to be Biden suggesting that they knew how to take it out which seems like a pretty weak place to build a large story.

What I find particularly odd is that this entire thing appears to be based on a single, unnamed source "with direct knowledge of the operational planning".

replies(18): >>34713169 #>>34713289 #>>34713318 #>>34713618 #>>34714956 #>>34715192 #>>34715760 #>>34716271 #>>34716360 #>>34717677 #>>34717883 #>>34718313 #>>34718875 #>>34719021 #>>34719781 #>>34727938 #>>34730841 #>>34835658 #
LarryMullins ◴[] No.34713289[source]
It's not unsourced, the source is being kept private. That may not seem like a meaningful difference but there is a difference. And that difference is the reason Seymour Hersh's reputation is relevant.
replies(4): >>34715240 #>>34716245 #>>34716374 #>>34716483 #
beebmam ◴[] No.34716374[source]
Well yeah, I think Seymour Hersh's reputation is relevant. He's pretty much a conspiracy theorist in this era.[1] Including his claim that the US never killed Osama bin Laden.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seymour_Hersh#Criticism_and_co...

replies(1): >>34716798 #
GAN_Game ◴[] No.34716798[source]
> his claim that the US never killed Osama bin Laden

You give a link but it is nowhere in that link. I watched an interview where Hersh talked about how the US killed bin Laden. Hersh has always said this.

Hersh did do reporting that countered parts of the US government story about bin Laden. Namely the idea no high Pakistani army/intelligence/government official knew where bin Laden was in Pakistan. As well as some other things.

The conspiracy theory is believing bin Laden sat in a big compound in Abbottabad with no one important in the Pakistani government knowing this. I guess the US government feels it needs to state this for some diplomatic reason, but it is ludicrous.

replies(2): >>34717181 #>>34719898 #
beebmam ◴[] No.34717181[source]
Seymour Hersh regarding the Osama bin Laden raid, in which the terrorist leader was killed in 2011: "Nothing's been done about that story, it's one big lie, not one word of it is true".

Later on in 2013, he changed his claim, such that he admitted some of the story is true, that is, that the terrorist leader was killed, after he encountered pushback.

Source: https://dailycaller.com/2013/09/27/hersh-slams-us-media-clai...

replies(3): >>34717415 #>>34717465 #>>34717955 #
1. GAN_Game ◴[] No.34717465[source]
In an interview with the Guardian he said, as you quote "Nothing's been done about that story, it's one big lie, not one word of it is true".

You take this statement he made and translate it to "his claim that the US never killed Osama bin Laden". The original quote you print is much clearer. I certainly don't translate his quote to what you translated it to.

Speaking of changed claims, both the White House and New York Times walked back claims they made in 2011 about bin Laden. So Hersh's claim of "a lie" and "not true", if you want to call it that, is true by their own admissions.

Incidentally the disputed issues are did anyone high up in the Pakistani government know bin Laden was there, how did the US learn he was there (connected to the first point), was the firefight killing bin Laden a kind of John Wayne/Audie Murphy production or was it more pedestrian etc.

If it's not pedantic that Hersh telling the interviewer "not one word of it is true" was hyperbole, when at least one word of the White House story was true, then you have a point on that statement. But it still does not automatically translate as you said. The original statement is more clearly what he said.

replies(1): >>34718050 #
2. beebmam ◴[] No.34718050[source]
I don't have a problem with people who change their claims, and willingly admit that their claims have changed. This is what I'd expect from decent humans and respectable journalists.

I do have a problem with people who change their claims and then deny that they changed their claims, like Seymour Hersh did, with respect to Osama bin Laden and stating that not a single word from the White House was true. That's disingenuous and it makes his credibility questionable, especially if he's going to rely on anonymous sources for his claims.

To address your claim that perhaps he was being hyperbolic in his statement: fine, but at least admit to that. He hasn't. He denied that he said it in the first place, which is a lie.