White House calls Seymour Hersh story about Osama bin Laden raid ‘baseless’
Source: Yahoo news
Famed investigative journalist Seymour Hersh is standing by his controversial account of the 2011 killing of Osama bin Laden despite a growing chorus of critics, including the White House, who say his version is flat-out wrong.
“This is not a wager,” Hersh told CNN’s “New Day” Monday. “This is a story that has to be dealt with by this government very seriously.”
“The White House’s story might have been written by Lewis Carroll,” Hersh wrote in a 10,356-word report published in the London Review of Books Sunday. “Would bin Laden, target of a massive international manhunt, really decide that a resort town 40 miles from Islamabad would be the safest place to live and command al-Qaida’s operations? He was hiding in the open. So America said.”
The White House refuted Hersh’s account Monday, calling his report “baseless.”
“There are too many inaccuracies and baseless assertions in this piece to fact-check each one,” White House National Security spokesman Ned Price said in a statement.
Read more: https://www.yahoo.com/politics/white-house-calls-seymour-hersh-story-about-osama-118704190246.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)and they are spinning the false story. They found Seymour Hersh as a patsy.
In the story it says that Pakistani military's Generals Kayani and Pasha were consulted by the white house and they gave explicit permission to allow the helicopters to fly over Pakistan.
Let's face it. Pakistan was utterly humiliated and so now they are saying Osama was a prisoner of ISI hahahahahahahahaha.
Wipe that egg off your face shitheads.
renegade000
(2,301 posts)which is why they felt the need to send out and risk highly classified stealth helicopters to complete the mission, lol.
Well I suppose I'm just not thinking hard enough. I can play the conspiracy theory game too. In order to maintain plausible deniability for Pakistan, the US purposefully made FAKE stealth helicopters, and made sure to crash one at the compound. And thus we can start adding more and more epicycles to our geocentric model to make it fit the data...
Of course the thing is, I do very much believe in conspiracies. People conspire all the time to do things that are considered unsavory. But usually the motivations and methods are fairly straightforward and banal. Conspiracy theories that involve vast complicity, labyrinthine machinations, and 100-dimensional chess, usually are the product of an over-excited mind eager to believe its got a secret insight that everyone else is too stupid or blind to see.
cosmicone
(11,014 posts)We had a Pakistani doctor do a fake vaccine survey and then, to continue the charade, Pakistan tried him for treason and jailed him.
Also, Osama was in ISI custody in Abbotabad since 2005, was in ISI custody and they were frantically trying to hand him over but we Americans simply wouldn't accept him till 2011 because we wanted more drama!!
iandhr
(6,852 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)his retirement in the manner that Pierre Salinger did.
billhicks76
(5,082 posts)I wouldn't be so quick to throw him under the bus quite yet.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Your book is truthful and too many others knows it is missing the real details sets a writer up differently. Why not just write a fictional book
candelista
(1,986 posts)That would show some respect for your readers.
I mean, look at that:
Your book is truthful and too many others knows it is missing the real details sets a writer up differently.
Response to candelista (Reply #7)
Post removed
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Show some respect and perhaps edit or delete your remark when you did not even copy the complete sentence. WOW
candelista
(1,986 posts)Here's the entire sentence:
I guess it is lots of writers dreams to write a book which is special but to declare Your book is truthful and too many others knows it is missing the real details sets a writer up differently.
Still nonsense.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #13)
Post removed
demwing
(16,916 posts)Response to demwing (Reply #16)
Post removed
demwing
(16,916 posts)And I feel just fine.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)DRoseDARs
(6,810 posts)"...to declare your book is truthful when too many critics know it is missing the real details sets up the writer differently. Why not just write a fictional book?"
Happy now? I parsed it as best as I thought matched his/her meaning. I've no dog in this fight, but you need to chill. You're on a collision course with a trial of your DU peers...
Larry Engels
(387 posts)All s/he did was to point out the weird grammar of the Thinkingabout post. I couldn't understand it either, and I'm not sure you do. I hardly think that criticizing someone's post for lack of comprehensibility deserves to be told to "chill...or else." If you don't like the posts, why don't you alert and call for a "trial"? Really, why are you using menacing tactics to silence someone?
DRoseDARs
(6,810 posts)You need to take a better look at the exchange and back off your accusation. 
Sgt Preston
(133 posts)I don't smoke at all. And I don't back off. Why are you being so nasty?
DRoseDARs
(6,810 posts)As I already stated, and you refused to read, I don't have a dog in the fight. I have no interest in reporting nor did I, but because the other poster was being an ass someone else was bound to report. And sure as shit, 3 posts have been hidden by jury decision exactly as I'd warned. I wasn't the one being nasty.
Sgt Preston
(133 posts)I'm just a newbie, but I don't understand why these posts have been suppressed. Something about "hurtful" or "over the top"? I've seen much, much worse on this site--calling people crazy, on dope, etc.
treestar
(82,383 posts)If all you can do it say you don't understand it.
I could make out what TA was saying - the suggestion of writing a fictional book clears it up.
Beauregard
(376 posts)And congratulations on comprehending nonsense.
treestar
(82,383 posts)
MisterP
(23,730 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)because of the shroud of secrecy surrounding the incident.
Convenient, that.
Basically it boils down to this: the Administration wants us to believe them, instead of Hersh, based upon their word. As if they didn't have reasons to lie. Who has more to gain from lying in this case: Hersh, or the Pentagon?
It comes down to "Whom do you trust?" Sy Hersh has never lied to me.
Ned Flanders
(233 posts)I recall Hersh promising to publish proof that Cheney had secret assassination teams which reported only to him. Maybe I misread that? But I also don't recall ever seeing him publish that proof.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)for the admin's version of events.
None exists for Hersh's demented fairy tale.
Psephos
(8,032 posts)And not in a good way.
IDK the real or whole story, but I knew the night it hit the news that we weren't getting either.
Skepticism is the lifeblood of science, as well as politics.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Psephos
(8,032 posts)Sgt Preston
(133 posts)You blew him off without being nasty. Congrats.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)I just did not realize how much.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)source and the retired ISI spymaster.
Very touching.
Sgt Preston
(133 posts)Maybe in some people's lexicon.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)like a cheesy A-Team script.
Rafale
(291 posts)Bin Ladin's death did not kill al-Qa'ida and al-Qa'ida is a larger, more powerful organization than in 2001. The so-called War on Terrorism is a complete failure and farce yet the majority of good people continue to blindly support it. Tragic. 
That conclusion is an indictment of the Clinton, Bush, and Obama Administrations. F!@# ideology and party allegiance.
The discourse about how and when bin Ladin was killed, if he was killed, is completely worthless and a stupid distraction. Don't fall for it.
Hestia
(3,818 posts)to this story - especially if the WH feels it needs to be answered. If it was untrue it would die a natural death. If there is some there there, then it must be addressed as baseless.
I'll take a respected journalist who is still at the top of his game before I will ever believe any government official. Y'all very responses follow and in other threads give credence to the story. Strange how that works, isn't it?
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)hoping to prey on the naiveté of readers who don't know Sy Hersh.
Sniff ... sniff ... do smell that? Smells like .... desperation.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)to be part of a WH conspiracy to cover up the conspiracy.
That is not rational. But it is very typical of those whose belief in conspiracy theories is of a religious, faith-based nature, regardless of what logic and the evidence suggest. Conspiracy theorists take every debunking or contradiction of their precious conspiracy theory as proof of the conspiracy.
It's why people laugh at them.
DBoon
(24,828 posts)That's what holds up the world
It's time to give the turtles a break!
Sgt Preston
(133 posts)Calling people crazy does not disprove their views.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)religious beliefs.
They just attribute any development, argument, fact, disclosure, etc that undercuts their conspiracy theory as just part of the conspiracy itself.
It's on vibrant display here--people disagree with them=CONSPIRACY!!!!
Beauregard
(376 posts)Iran Contra
November 1986, a Lebanese weekly, Al-Shiraa, reported that the U.S. government had secretly sold military weapons to so-called moderate factions in Iran. In exchange for the arms sales, according to Al-Shiraa, the moderate Iranians would work to secure the release of U.S. citizens held hostage in Lebanon. Thus began an investigation into a conspiracy that became popularly known as the iran-contra affair.
Congressional investigations that followed the Al-Shiraa article revealed a covert "enterprise" connected with the arms sales. The operation, staffed by private citizens and funded by private monies, had diverted profits from the sale of the weapons to the Contras, a loosely knit military force in Honduras that sought to overthrow the socialist Sandinista government in Nicaragua.
Congressional investigations in the spring of 1987 revealed that the enterprise had been supervised by U.S. national security council (NSC) staff. The NSC, created by the National Security Act of 1947 (61 Stat. 496 [50 U.S.C.A. §§ 402]) and amended by the National Security Act Amendments of 1949 (63 Stat. 579 [50 U.S.C.A. § 401 et seq.]), existed to advise the president with respect to the integration of domestic, foreign, and military policies relating to national security.
One of the many problems presented by the enterprise was its apparent violation of the Boland amendments to a series of appropriations bills. These bills were established in the early 1980s to prevent any "agency or entity of the United States involved in intelligence activities" from spending funds available to it "to support military or paramilitary operations in Nicaragua" (133 Cong. Rec. H4982-87 [daily ed. June 15, 1987]). The covert arms sales also violated procedural and substantive requirements of the Arms Export Control Act of 1976 (Pub. L. No. 90-629, 82 Stat. 1320 [22 U.S.C.A. §§ 2751–2796c (1989 Supp.)]). Moreover, the executive branch's failure to notify Congress of the covert arms sales flouted the reporting provisions of the 1980 Intelligence Oversight Act (Pub. L. No. 96-450, tit. IV, § 407(b)(1), 94 Stat. 1981 [50 U.S.C.A. § 413 (1982)]).
In 1987, Lawrence Walsh, a former american bar association president and former federal judge, was assigned by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Independent Counsel Division, to investigate the Contra-funding scheme. In March 1988, Walsh charged Richard Secord, Albert Hakim, Oliver North, and John Poindexter with conspiracy to obstruct the U.S. government. North and Poindexter had worked for the NSC.
As in all conspiracy cases, an important goal of the prosecution was to determine who was involved in the agreement. A major issue in the Iran-Contra investigation was to determine precisely who in the executive branch authorized or was aware of the arms diversions and, specifically, whether the president had knowledge of the unlawful activities.
In the legal battles that ensued over access to information in connection with the prosecutions, Walsh faced challenges by the ronald reagan and george h. w. bush administrations, the justice department, intelligence agencies, and lawyers for the accused. Ultimately, the White House refused to relinquish classified information crucial to the prosecutions, and Walsh was forced to drop all conspiracy charges. The Iran-Contra Affair resulted in criminal convictions of several persons directly connected with the Reagan administration, but Walsh was never able to link the president to a conspiracy to obstruct the U.S. government.
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/conspiracy.aspx
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Just by the response, one thinks of Snowden and Wikileaks and the long list of content-empty prevarications we saw with them. If the official version was true, it should be well-documented too, the military is big on records.
Skittles
(170,256 posts)
former9thward
(33,424 posts)It was a vague denial which did not deny anything.
Big_Mike
(509 posts)easing of enforcement on medical marijuana, deportations...
Their track record is horrible. They have been known to twist the truth to suit their goals. Of course, they are politicians.
I believe him (My Lai, the 9/11 stuff, etc.) over them just about always.
Oh, and I forgot - - - GO BERNIE!!!!!!
Sgt Preston
(133 posts)
SunSeeker
(57,904 posts)Hersh just embarrasses himself in this little exchange:
“If I’m wrong about Utah, that’s just a mistake, because I know exactly where they were in Nevada,” he said. “Sometimes my geography gets lousy.”
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/white-house-calls-seymour-hersh-story-about-osama-118704190246.html
Sgt Preston
(133 posts)But it isn't Sy Hersh.
SunSeeker
(57,904 posts)As the Vox story on this (see post #41) stated:
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Sgt Preston
(133 posts)I've noticed it for years. They say "refute" to mean "rebut." It's gotten so common that Merriam Webster's even includes it as a second meaning:
2: to say that (something) is not true
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/refute
I don't like it, but there it is!
bemildred
(90,061 posts)But yeah.
MBS
(9,688 posts)concluding paragraphs:
For example, a 2013 piece claiming that the Obama administration “cherry-picked” intelligence about the use of chemical weapons by forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar Assad was turned down by both The New York Times and The Washington Post. But his reputation, at least in the halls of power in Washington, seems to have hit a low point. . . .
Another former intelligence official with direct knowledge of the bin Laden operation speculated that the Pakistanis, who were “furious” that U.S. troops entered the heart of the country without being detected, were behind the false story as a way to save face. “They finally found somebody to bite.”
Max Fisher on Vox.com:
http://www.vox.com/2015/5/11/8584473/seymour-hersh-osama-bin-laden
The story simply does not hold up to scrutiny — and, sadly, is in line with Hersh's recent turn away from the investigative reporting that made him famous into unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. A decade ago, Hersh was one of the most respected investigative journalists on the planet, having broken major stories from the My Lai massacre in 1969 to the Abu Ghraib scandal in 2004. But more recently, his reports have become less and less credible. He's claimed that 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, and that the 2013 chemical weapons attack in Syria was a "false flag" staged by the government of Turkey. Those reports have had little proof and, rather than being borne out by subsequent investigations, have been either unsubstantiated or outright debunked. A close reading of Hersh's bin Laden story suggests it is likely to suffer the same fate. . .
Hersh produces no supporting documents or proof, nor is the authority of either source established. We are given no reason to believe that either Durrani or the "knowledgeable official" would have even second- or thirdhand knowledge of what occurred, yet their word is treated as gospel. His other two sources are anonymous "consultants" who are vaguely described as insiders.Beyond that, Hersh's proof is that he finds the official story of the Osama bin Laden raid to be unconvincing. . .If that seems like worryingly little evidence for a story that accuses hundreds of people across three governments of staging a massive international hoax that has gone on for years, then you are not alone.
On Sunday night, national security journalists and analysts on Twitter picked through the story, expressing dismay at its tissue-thin sourcing, its leaps of logic, and its internal contradictions. . .
As time goes on, Hersh's stories seem to become more spectacular, more thinly sourced, and more difficult to square with reality as we know it. Perhaps one day they will all be vindicated: the Opus Dei special forces cabal, the terrorist training in Nevada, the American plan to nuke Iran, the Turkish false flag in Syria, even the American-Pakistani bin Laden ruse.Maybe there really is a vast shadow world of complex and diabolical conspiracies, executed brilliantly by international networks of government masterminds. And maybe Hersh and his handful of anonymous former senior officials really are alone in glimpsing this world and its terrifying secrets. Or maybe there's a simpler explanation.
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)"What I find so disturbing is that the Administration knows that large portions of the US finding bin Laden story are fabrication and it's very keen on selling this cover story to the US public," she says.
This is "not to hide key operational details and capacities, but rather to satisfy the PR needs of a re-election campaign. The Soviets couldn't have done a better job".
In other words, she suggests, it's politics. The media narrative makes the President look a decisive man of action, the liberal version of George W. Bush's stunt landing a plane on a US carrier in 2003 to declare "mission accomplished" after invading Iraq.
"It will be very interesting when the timeline of the CIA's knowledge of where Osama bin Laden was being hidden and the US decision to go in and take out bin Laden comes to light," says Hillhouse.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=10746318
Sgt Preston
(133 posts)Why share the credit with the "Pakis," when you can claim it all for yourself?
jakeXT
(10,575 posts)Sgt Preston
(133 posts)
laserhaas
(7,805 posts)One of the key teachings to any Detective, is that you go straight and hard after anything labeled a "coincidence".
Too many in the Bin Laden saga - to ignore.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Let's say, arguendo, all the reports of how Osama Bin Laden was killed are true. That Seal Team 6 flew in and wammo bamo - the job was done.
Amazing how they then claim to bury Osama at sea - with no proof to you or me.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Then, wammo bamo - suddenly Seal Team 6 is dead - TOO!
Placed in a shoddy helicopter and (purportedly) brought down by lucky Q'dy shot.
Are your "coincidence" alarm bells going off yet?
NO>?
REALLY!
-------------------------------------------------------------
Then how about this glaring coincidence.
When the military gathered the next of kin together (bad idea big gov - your goal is to keep U.S. apart - as easy to muster/ corner) - they told the families of the Heroes that;
"Your sons are not coming home - we made the decision to cremate them"
The official (utter Bull Chit story) is that the bodies were burned beyond recognition.
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2013/12/24/341678/seal-team-6--the-ultimate-burn/
================================
But one parent was shown a picture of his son on the ground - with NO burns
Sgt Preston
(133 posts)If someone wanted to cover up the real story of the assassination of Bin Laden, killing members of the assassination team would be useful. They weren't all killed, though, were they?
Corey_Baker08
(2,157 posts)I call Bullshit
Blue_Tires
(57,596 posts)