General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI don't know who/what to believe in latest Seymour Hersh story.
He was just on Chris Hayes show and I was way put off by his arrogance (Hersh's). He says the whole "we got bin Laden" story is wrong, that it did not go down the way Obama said and Obama inexplicably broke the story 7 to 10 days before it was to be made public.
The bombshell seems to be the allegation that Pakistan knew where he was all the time and we protected Pakistan. Picking sides in that part of the world (everything East of Europe and West of us?) creates those damned tangled alliances so I guess I can believe we would have covered for Pakistan (like we undoubtedly did for Saudi Arabia after 9/11).
So, my question, is Hersh right and the alleged cover up an understandable response to the mess that is that part of the world and how we get our intelligence.
Or is this the non story I suspect this is.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Who cares?
think
(11,641 posts)Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)jakeXT
(10,575 posts)think
(11,641 posts)jakeXT
(10,575 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)in 50 years when this is declassified. If not, well we will all be pushing daisies.
Given that we have had a lot of crap made up by both democratic and republican administrations when it comes to empire.... since Korea, I would say the truth lies somewhere in between.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)I'd run outside to check. In general I won't believe any politician without strong evidence. Most times I just assume they're lying until someone proves otherwise.
So this doesn't suprise me at all. I trust Hersh more than the government/military so I'll believe him until the government can manage a persuasive defense.
procon
(15,805 posts)He has unnamed sources.
He drops well placed innuendos.
He makes assumptions.
He tells a good story and makes a good living writing this kind of stuff.
It really wasn't much of a "bombshell" that Pakistan knew where he was, of course they did. Go back and read the earlier news stories that came out just after the raid where the ties to police, military and govt were discussed.
Yes, we protect Pakistan and still do because they are a fragile state surrounded by hostile factions with an inept government in possession of nuclear weapons. To leave withdraw our support would be far more disasterous.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)An earlier story by Marcy Wheeler fairly closely mirrors my own view on the subject:
http://www.salon.com/2015/05/11/everything_we_know_about_the_death_of_osama_bin_laden_is_wrong/
Indeed, weve been told cover story after cover story after cover story. Does that mean that CIA torture dead-enders invented details that could conveniently attach to Bin Ladens death? Thats what evidence from CIAs own records, cited in the Senate Torture report, shows. Does that mean the SEALs never considered capturing, rather than killing, Bin Laden? Thats what evolving stories from SEAL participants suggest.
When Hersh brought and confirmed his story to Durrani, the retired Pakistani General, the General said the Pakistani public would be grateful when his story came out because people like to be told the truth.
But thats not actually right. People like to be told stories. Whether theyre true or not is of little import, if they hang together and serve certain purposes.
We neither the American, nor the Pakistani public has ever been told a true story about Bin Ladens death. Or even one that hangs together.
This is yet another version, no more convincing than John Brennans tale that Bin Laden hid behind one of his wives.
Which is perhaps evidence that the key players in this story intend to keep spinning cover story after cover story to hide the real details of what happened in Pakistan the night Osama Bin Laden was killed.
grasswire
(50,130 posts)That will tell you a lot about what the back story is.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)What do expect our OP to learn?
grasswire
(50,130 posts)OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Poorly, I might add.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)E.g., "I can't back up my premise..."
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Bonobo
(29,257 posts)...they had a photographer all ready for the photo showing Obama's and Clinton's "spontaneous" reaction.
Seems like it was likely planned to be used for political purposes. Things are like that in the real world.
That doesn't mean that the Admin lied, but it is part of a larger picture if you choose to be open to such possibilities.
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Hamlette
(15,407 posts)KT2000
(20,567 posts)knew where he was. We all knew that if we kept up on the news. Interfering in Pakistani politics carried risks that the US preferred not to agitate to get bin Laden. Pakistan has nuclear weapons.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)He's full of shit.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)Hamlette
(15,407 posts)I guess I've not been following things as well as I think. I remember him as being honorable. Prolly why I was surprised to realize his story is BS. You should see Chris Hayes' expression when Hersh makes a particularly arrogant comment. Was kinda funny.
JI7
(89,239 posts)and them knowing he was there is nothing new.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)And I'm guessing there is one side we will never hear.
applegrove
(118,462 posts)was more to the story of how bin Laden was found. As if the CIA, who cooperated with the film, would give up all their assets in finding bin Laden to the public. So I can believe that that part of the zero dark thirty explanation is not real. Abd that hersh's version of a Pakistani walk in may be closer to the truth. Obama never talked about that part of the story. Just the Cia to the movie producers. And I would expect some misdirection from them. The other part of hersh's story I don't really buy. That said we don't know until the government papers get released in what? 50 years.
doc03
(35,293 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)randys1
(16,286 posts)Personally I am not in favor of assassination of anyone, but he is dead and that is that
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Two years later, when I was researching my book, I learned from a high-level member of the Pakistani intelligence service that the ISI had been hiding Bin Laden and ran a desk specifically to handle him as an intelligence asset. After the book came out, I learned more: that it was indeed a Pakistani Army brigadier all the senior officers of the ISI are in the military who told the C.I.A. where Bin Laden was hiding, and that Bin Laden was living there with the knowledge and protection of the ISI.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/05/11/former-professor-reported-basics-hershs-bin-laden-story-2011-seemingly-different-sources/
noise
(2,392 posts)We should believe them. Period. That is the way it should be.
All the real details of the Bin Laden mission are thoroughly explained in the excellent government assisted documentary Zero Dark Thirty. You should check it out.
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)I guess every nation needs a Riefenstahl
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/04/letter-kathryn-bigelow-zero-dark-thirty