4 ms·
Seymour Hersh is not credible anymore. This is all based on a single anonymous source, that hasn't been supported by any other sources or evidence. He is known
by erentz 4y ago
Seymour Hersh is not credible anymore. This is all based on a single anonymous source, that hasn't been supported by any other sources or evidence. He is known to have just made stuff up to suit, which is probably why the NY Times and other papers passed on this and he had to put it on a new substack.
https://www.vox.com/2015/5/11/8584473/seymour-hersh-osama-bin-laden https://www.vox.com/2015/5/11/8584473/seymour-hersh-osama-bi...
- pydry 4y agoHersh claims that bin Laden's compound was controlled by Pakistani intelligence always seemed rather plausible to me given that Abottabad was an HQ for them. What has Seymour written that you think been comprehensively disproven?
- erentz 4y agoI grant you it's long, but it's not just about bin Laden. Give that article a read to start. Then ask yourself why you think assertions from this person should now be believed first, disproven later, rather than corroborated and proven first like journalism is supposed to be done.
- pydry 4y agoI glanced over it. It tries to do the usual muckraking thing that was also tried on him over my lai by Nixon's lot. I might be missing some specific, damning piece of evidence but I didn't see it. If you do see it, please draw my attention to it.
- koheripbal 4y agoThere are lots of conspiracy theories that haven't been disproved. More importantly, none of Hersh's conspiracy theories have EVER been proven real. He won a Journalism Prize literally 50 years ago for some photos that he took, and he leverages that fame to push anti-US conspiracy theories with zero evidence.
- pydry 4y agoAbu Ghraib was called a tapestry of nonsense by the Pentagon when he broke it. It is, as you say, a conspiracy theory that hasn't been disproven.