5 ms·

glad you took the time to cherry pick that one thing and completely ignore, say, the Opus Dei comment, which is egregious nonsense that you have actually repeat

glad you took the time to cherry pick that one thing and completely ignore, say, the Opus Dei comment, which is egregious nonsense that you have actually repeated here. Or even, g-d forbid, read the linked article and confront that.

tptacek 8y ago
Strange that it was the unbidden personal attack that leapt out at me about your comment, and not the carefully reasoned argument that followed. I'll try harder next time.
- dtornabene 8y ago
  Its a little annoying watching you repeat these things and not only that but to take time to jump into any thread that critically discusses the military/security agencies and dismiss all criticism with the most absurd reasoning and then pretend that you've been attacked so as to avoid having to reckon with what it is your actually doing. For example, quite recently on a thread about the Cuba Embassy TBI incident. Unlike other people on here I don't think this makes you some automatic spy/asset/plant but having had to deal directly with security state as I personally have, and as my family has literally for generations, you get annoyed at people attacking good journalism because it conflicts with you ideology.
  - tptacek 8y ago
    Here's a bylined piece in Foreign Policy quoting Hersh directly. I assume you just weren't aware of it, when you claimed that what I wrote about his Opus Dei (CORRECTION! Knights of Malta! HUGE difference.) conspiracy theory was all second- and third-hand. I had to do serious research --- I literally spelled out Hersh's name and then typed "Opus Dei" after it into the Google search bar --- to find it. http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/01/18/seymour-hersh-unleashed/ http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/01/18/seymour-hersh-unleashed/ Thanks, truly, for letting me off the hook as "some automatic spy/asset/plant". That definitely doesn't at all come across as the personal attack it clearly, obviously is.
    - dtornabene 8y ago
      Here's the full quote on the would be "Opus Dei" comment from the piece, cut and pasted: “Many of them are members of Opus Dei,” Hersh continued. “They do see what they’re doing — and this is not an atypical attitude among some military — it’s a crusade, literally. They see themselves as the protectors of the Christians. They’re protecting them from the Muslims [as in] the 13th century. And this is their function.” “They have little insignias, these coins they pass among each other, which are crusader coins,” he continued. “They have insignia that reflect the whole notion that this is a culture war. … Right now, there’s a tremendous, tremendous amount of anti-Muslim feeling in the military community.” Thats it. Thats all. "Many of them", "not an atypical attitude". Your quote, that started this sub thread was this: "Among them, he believes that USSOCOM is run by a secret cabal of Opus Dei Catholics". Little bit of a difference here. In fact I'll go out on a limb and say a rather large difference. Again, Jeff Sharlet, Mike Weinstein, there are a number of others who have done the serious, necessary investigative reporting on this and if anything its even more frightening then the comments from the Doha speech Hersh gave (which for the record were also uncontroversial at the time he gave them to anyone who has followed military reporting). I might take a moment to point out I was in ROTC in college, my family has served for generations. You can take my criticism any way you want, but calling out your crit of Hersh, for the sloppiness and exageration it is, is not a personal attack. As for the comment about spy/plant/whatever, I've been on this site long enough to know that was a bit of thing some years back and was trying to go out of my way to note that I don't think that about you, that I think many people make these arguments/judgments from places of sincerity, but that that doesn't make them correct. EDIT: I'm going to assume that Thomas has no interest in seriously reckoning with what I'm trying to say and simply add, anyone who happens on this comment subthread, take the time to read the unfortunately long LRB piece linked in my original comment, its important. Its kind of amazing (and sad) that this discussion devolved into this back and forth because that piece, the response to that piece in the American press (by people exactly Blake Hounshell btw) and the subsequent way things worked out in regard to Mike Flynn, Trump, Obama, the election, and the now Russia Investigation could all themselves be wrapped up into their own long form piece on political and media culture and the consequences of dismissing people like Hersh. Here it is again for the interested: https://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military https://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-mi...

tptacek 8y ago

Strange that it was the unbidden personal attack that leapt out at me about your comment, and not the carefully reasoned argument that followed. I'll try harder next time.

dtornabene 8y ago
Its a little annoying watching you repeat these things and not only that but to take time to jump into any thread that critically discusses the military/security agencies and dismiss all criticism with the most absurd reasoning and then pretend that you've been attacked so as to avoid having to reckon with what it is your actually doing. For example, quite recently on a thread about the Cuba Embassy TBI incident. Unlike other people on here I don't think this makes you some automatic spy/asset/plant but having had to deal directly with security state as I personally have, and as my family has literally for generations, you get annoyed at people attacking good journalism because it conflicts with you ideology.
- tptacek 8y ago
  Here's a bylined piece in Foreign Policy quoting Hersh directly. I assume you just weren't aware of it, when you claimed that what I wrote about his Opus Dei (CORRECTION! Knights of Malta! HUGE difference.) conspiracy theory was all second- and third-hand. I had to do serious research --- I literally spelled out Hersh's name and then typed "Opus Dei" after it into the Google search bar --- to find it. http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/01/18/seymour-hersh-unleashed/ http://foreignpolicy.com/2011/01/18/seymour-hersh-unleashed/ Thanks, truly, for letting me off the hook as "some automatic spy/asset/plant". That definitely doesn't at all come across as the personal attack it clearly, obviously is.
  - dtornabene 8y ago
    Here's the full quote on the would be "Opus Dei" comment from the piece, cut and pasted: “Many of them are members of Opus Dei,” Hersh continued. “They do see what they’re doing — and this is not an atypical attitude among some military — it’s a crusade, literally. They see themselves as the protectors of the Christians. They’re protecting them from the Muslims [as in] the 13th century. And this is their function.” “They have little insignias, these coins they pass among each other, which are crusader coins,” he continued. “They have insignia that reflect the whole notion that this is a culture war. … Right now, there’s a tremendous, tremendous amount of anti-Muslim feeling in the military community.” Thats it. Thats all. "Many of them", "not an atypical attitude". Your quote, that started this sub thread was this: "Among them, he believes that USSOCOM is run by a secret cabal of Opus Dei Catholics". Little bit of a difference here. In fact I'll go out on a limb and say a rather large difference. Again, Jeff Sharlet, Mike Weinstein, there are a number of others who have done the serious, necessary investigative reporting on this and if anything its even more frightening then the comments from the Doha speech Hersh gave (which for the record were also uncontroversial at the time he gave them to anyone who has followed military reporting). I might take a moment to point out I was in ROTC in college, my family has served for generations. You can take my criticism any way you want, but calling out your crit of Hersh, for the sloppiness and exageration it is, is not a personal attack. As for the comment about spy/plant/whatever, I've been on this site long enough to know that was a bit of thing some years back and was trying to go out of my way to note that I don't think that about you, that I think many people make these arguments/judgments from places of sincerity, but that that doesn't make them correct. EDIT: I'm going to assume that Thomas has no interest in seriously reckoning with what I'm trying to say and simply add, anyone who happens on this comment subthread, take the time to read the unfortunately long LRB piece linked in my original comment, its important. Its kind of amazing (and sad) that this discussion devolved into this back and forth because that piece, the response to that piece in the American press (by people exactly Blake Hounshell btw) and the subsequent way things worked out in regard to Mike Flynn, Trump, Obama, the election, and the now Russia Investigation could all themselves be wrapped up into their own long form piece on political and media culture and the consequences of dismissing people like Hersh. Here it is again for the interested: https://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-military https://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n01/seymour-m-hersh/military-to-mi...