who could’ve seen this coming

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
84 points

Hersh first gained recognition in 1969 for exposing the My Lai Massacre and its cover-up during the Vietnam War, for which he received the 1970 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting. During the 1970s, Hersh covered the Watergate scandal for The New York Times and revealed the clandestine bombing of Cambodia. In 2004, he reported on the U.S. military’s mistreatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison. He has also won two National Magazine Awards and five George Polk Awards. In 2004, he received the George Orwell Award.

Hersh has accused the Obama administration of lying about the events surrounding the death of Osama bin Laden and disputed the claim that the Assad regime used chemical weapons on civilians in the Syrian Civil War. Both assertions have stirred controversy.

Damn so this shit ain’t new to him. Some are critical of him for citing anonymous sources which included me, which is why I searched him up in the first place

permalink
report
reply
52 points

The points in favor of trusting the source here are:

  1. Tons of circumstantial evidence pointing in the same direction
  2. The significant history of the journalist breaking/reporting on similar stories
  3. It’s presumably someone inside the U.S. government being critical of it, meaning less incentive to make up this kind of story
permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points
*

Democrats will reject the story for obvious reasons. The Republicans, however, will reject the story because the source said of Biden “I gotta admit the guy has a pair of balls. He said he was going to do it, and he did.”

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

I mean it really does take balls to point a proverbial shotgun at your foot and pull your finger

permalink
report
parent
reply

Liberals basically cut him off after the Syria stories

permalink
report
parent
reply

Hence the sub stack instead of the New York Times

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

Covering My Lai, jesus this guy is kinda a big deal

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I still have a step 0 objection to the chemical weapon theory. Why bother with chemical weapons? They’re a pain in the ass and they’ll make everyone mad at you. Just use HE or incendiaries. It’s like deciding to insult someone by shooting their mother instead of just flipping them off. Same result but why give yourself the extra grief?

And then Assad immediately complies with demands to turn over any and all remaining gas in the country anyway, so it must not have even been militarily important if he was willing to use it once to kill some civvies then turn around and immediately dismantle it all.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Decades of reporting on the biggest coverrups of the US military, but the Syria claims make him persona non grata.

permalink
report
parent
reply