4 ms·

I completely agree. He has a Pulitzer Prize, five Polk awards, two national magazine awards. Broke My Lai, Abu Ghraib, and exposed the Israeli nuclear program.

I completely agree. He has a Pulitzer Prize, five Polk awards, two national magazine awards. Broke My Lai, Abu Ghraib, and exposed the Israeli nuclear program. He is easily the most accomplished journalist for several generations. That doesn’t automatically mean this story is right but to dismiss him in emotional and inaccurate terms doesn’t speak to a rational, evidence-based interpretation of the facts.

XorNot 4y ago
Seymour Hersh has also gone off the deep end lately. Some current examples[1]: * the Osama bin Laden raid was faked in a conspiracy with Pakistan and he was actually captured in 2006 * much of the US special forces is controlled by secret members of Opus Dei * that the US military flew Iranian terrorists to Nevada for training * the 2013 chemical weapons attack in Syria was a "false flag" staged by the government of Turkey Being right decades ago doesn't somehow absolve you of having to have verifiable sources and evidence when you go on to make numerous other claims that don't happen and no one can verify. [1] 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...
- maybelsyrup 4y ago
  We live in a world where the CIA has a heart attack gun [1], a presidential administration faked evidence of WMD to go to war in Iraq, the CDC conducted secret medical torture on black men with syphilis, and the Pentagon sent JFK proposals to justify a war on Cuba by conducting false flag terrorist attacks against American civilians [2]. (JFK rejected them, apparently.) So I read a list like yours, and read you scoffing at the implausibility of any of those things, and I remember just how different we all can be. [1] https://www.military.com/video/guns/pistols/cias-secret-heart-attack-gun/2555371072001 https://www.military.com/video/guns/pistols/cias-secret-hear... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
  - XorNot 4y ago
    Yes and you know what all those things have in common? Actual evidence which corresponds to real events, and multiple sources confirming that they happened. What Hersh's suppositions have is a stunning lack of verifiable evidence and observably factually incorrect assertions (as in the case of his articles on Nordstream).
    - maybelsyrup 4y ago
      Saying someone's claims don't (yet) have the kind of evidence you demand is pretty different from calling someone crazy (and in so doing implying that those claims are not worth the consideration of the sane). The only thing your bullet points were doing is suggesting "look at the delusions of this maniac! He can't be trusted because of them". But because the completely insane shit in my list turned out to be true, Hersh's sorts of claims are at least as plausible as the insane shit I listed in my reply. (And in the case of the first two, they were labeled by bienpensants of all kinds as proof that the claimant was certifiably nuts or at least unworthy of Serious Attention ... until the day they were shown to be true.) All I'm saying is that, given the factual record of conspiracy and sociopathy on the part of the world's powerful, something like "2013 chemical weapons attack in Syria was a "false flag" staged by the government of Turkey" can't easily be used to dismiss someone as nuts. Not enough evidence? Sure, whatever (but let's wait a decade or two). Crazy though? Nope.
      - XorNot 4y ago
        Over 10 years. It's one thing to have a story out there no one can prove, it's quite another to have been continuously publishing things you can't prove and which no one else can find any evidence of despite looking. There are multiple factual claims about verifiable vessels, planes and movements being made and none of them are true. All your saying is, despite obvious factual inconsistencies in the parts of the story which should be publicly verifiable, you've already got a conclusion you like. Which is what everyone's doing because the real big secret is "it was Russia" is a boring conclusion that doesn't move clicks.

XorNot 4y ago

Seymour Hersh has also gone off the deep end lately. Some current examples[1]: * the Osama bin Laden raid was faked in a conspiracy with Pakistan and he was actually captured in 2006 * much of the US special forces is controlled by secret members of Opus Dei * that the US military flew Iranian terrorists to Nevada for training * the 2013 chemical weapons attack in Syria was a "false flag" staged by the government of Turkey Being right decades ago doesn't somehow absolve you of having to have verifiable sources and evidence when you go on to make numerous other claims that don't happen and no one can verify. [1] 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...

maybelsyrup 4y ago
We live in a world where the CIA has a heart attack gun [1], a presidential administration faked evidence of WMD to go to war in Iraq, the CDC conducted secret medical torture on black men with syphilis, and the Pentagon sent JFK proposals to justify a war on Cuba by conducting false flag terrorist attacks against American civilians [2]. (JFK rejected them, apparently.) So I read a list like yours, and read you scoffing at the implausibility of any of those things, and I remember just how different we all can be. [1] https://www.military.com/video/guns/pistols/cias-secret-heart-attack-gun/2555371072001 https://www.military.com/video/guns/pistols/cias-secret-hear... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
- XorNot 4y ago
  Yes and you know what all those things have in common? Actual evidence which corresponds to real events, and multiple sources confirming that they happened. What Hersh's suppositions have is a stunning lack of verifiable evidence and observably factually incorrect assertions (as in the case of his articles on Nordstream).
  - maybelsyrup 4y ago
    Saying someone's claims don't (yet) have the kind of evidence you demand is pretty different from calling someone crazy (and in so doing implying that those claims are not worth the consideration of the sane). The only thing your bullet points were doing is suggesting "look at the delusions of this maniac! He can't be trusted because of them". But because the completely insane shit in my list turned out to be true, Hersh's sorts of claims are at least as plausible as the insane shit I listed in my reply. (And in the case of the first two, they were labeled by bienpensants of all kinds as proof that the claimant was certifiably nuts or at least unworthy of Serious Attention ... until the day they were shown to be true.) All I'm saying is that, given the factual record of conspiracy and sociopathy on the part of the world's powerful, something like "2013 chemical weapons attack in Syria was a "false flag" staged by the government of Turkey" can't easily be used to dismiss someone as nuts. Not enough evidence? Sure, whatever (but let's wait a decade or two). Crazy though? Nope.
    - XorNot 4y ago
      Over 10 years. It's one thing to have a story out there no one can prove, it's quite another to have been continuously publishing things you can't prove and which no one else can find any evidence of despite looking. There are multiple factual claims about verifiable vessels, planes and movements being made and none of them are true. All your saying is, despite obvious factual inconsistencies in the parts of the story which should be publicly verifiable, you've already got a conclusion you like. Which is what everyone's doing because the real big secret is "it was Russia" is a boring conclusion that doesn't move clicks.