dagblog - Comments for "Seymour Hersh's Alternate History of the War on Terror"

Ocean-K ":..most damning

NCD — Thu, 14 May 2015 15:36:55 +0000

Ocean-K ":..most damning rebuttal I've read claims that while the deal to give over Bin Laden was for increased aid to Pakistan actually the aid decreased after the raid...."

Call that the "the Pakistan accounting fantasy theory"

The Premise:

All US/CIA/Pentagon funds openly or secretly remitted, transferred or deposited, or caused to be sent by corporate or state 3rd parties, to "Pakistan", including all funds for any person, organization, entity, ISI or military officer, anyone in or not in Pakistan relating to Pakistan operations, including the "official government" or parts thereof, are in their entirety made public, and are accounted for in the annual budget, authenticated to the appropriate oversight committees of Congress for approval, and made available to the national media.

The word "conspiracy" has

PeraclesPlease — Thu, 14 May 2015 09:26:01 +0000

In reply to This theory fails for the

The word "conspiracy" has become a parlor trick that distracts from actually analyzing situations.

Of course our attempts to catch Osama bin Laden would be an official conspiracy to weed out some clue from somewhere - human intelligence or satellite/drone surveillance or some collaborator/turncoat somewhere or the load of torture-for-revelations or ...

There's little doubt that US government & US military would embellish or distort the conditions of OBL's capture & killing - like with Pat Tillman or Jessica Lynch or anything else (Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen...) - so it's more a matter of objectively evaluating and deciding which details from USG or Hersh or elsewhere seem believable and why.

Our whole training program in Iraq & Afghanistan was a fiasco that still managed to bolster the career of Petraeus until he self-destructed. That "conspiracy" is in plain sight, but only a few hippie bloggers see it or care, while everyone else is invested in the notion that the surge worked and they stood up while we stood down - even though civilian death rates remain consistently horrid and the local police forces remain ineffective. But a storyline has been created, and that's what will stay, whatever new facts appear.

That doesn't mean any new storylines are true - only that first-mover advantage is completely effective and extremely difficult to counter. You don't have to pay people to keep quiet or go along - they just naturally do - hear a story & if it sounds convincing enough, you pass it along. By day 3, the OBL story was cemented in our brains in full detail, whether exaggerated or not. It's also why the Republicans set out to put doubt about Benghazi from day 1 - no matter what Susan Rice had actually said in public, they simply said she hadn't said it and built their counter hyped conspiracy story from there. And for a lot of the populace, that's the storyline they believe. Lather, rinse, repeat.

This theory fails for the

ocean-kat — Wed, 13 May 2015 21:45:40 +0000

In reply to Seymour Hersh's Alternate History of the War on Terror

This theory fails for the same reason most conspiracy theories fail. There are just too many people involved that would have to keep the secret for it to succeed in the first place and too many to keep it secret afterwards. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. But the most damning rebuttal I've read claims that while the deal to give over Bin Laden was for increased aid to Pakistan actually the aid decreased after the raid. Somehow all the parties were so competent they were able to pull off this fraud yet lacked the competence to follow though on the deal. It all seems unlikely to me.

I think it's obvious that the

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 13 May 2015 03:31:52 +0000

In reply to A newspaper has now released

I think it's obvious that the U.S. had Pakistani sources, and I find it totally plausible that officials used a cover story to protect them. That wouldn't be shocking. I think it's also likely that ISI knew Bin Laden's whereabouts. What's shocking is Hersh's allegation that the U.S. cut a deal with ISI, that the entire raid was essentially staged, and that Bin Laden was deliberately assassinated.

As for the polio doctor, Shakil Afridi, Hersh presents him as a fall guy, deliberately set up by the CIA to protect another source. In some ways, this shocks me more than anything else. All the other alleged crimes are essentially victimless (except Bin Laden but no sympathy there). But if the article is right, Afridi was an innocent victim.

A newspaper has now released

rmrd0000 — Wed, 13 May 2015 01:56:06 +0000

In reply to Very interesting, especially

Correction: The WaPo had released the name of the Pakistani intelligence officer suspected of informing on Osama's location in 2012. A physician who conducted a fake polio campaign to help flush out Osama's location was also named. I wonder if this information, whether correct or not, places their lives in danger? Will it have any impact on others who might provide useful intelligence that comes with high personal risk? Perhaps the pushback on Hersh is part of a need to protect sources. Should the U.S. Confirm that they had a Pakistani source.

(Corrected to note that the link was referring to the 2022 WaPo article).

http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-2-317717-Brig-Usman-Khalid-informe...

Very interesting, especially

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 13 May 2015 01:11:39 +0000

In reply to Carlotta Gall seems to

Very interesting, especially since the NYT's main story today was so skeptical. Here's the link to Gall's piece for anyone else who wants to read it: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/12/magazine/the-detail-in-seymour-hershs-...

Yes, Hersh corroborated some

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 13 May 2015 01:10:01 +0000

In reply to Josh is an inside the beltway

Yes, Hersh corroborated some parts with other sources, but both the big picture and all the juicy details came from one guy.

Sure, this isn't Josh's beat, but it's way too big a story for TPM to ignore. Weird. Maybe he's waiting to see how it pans out.

PS It was a loose analogy, no need to press it.

Josh is an inside the beltway

NCD — Tue, 12 May 2015 23:59:54 +0000

In reply to Odd, why hasn't Josh Marshall

MW- Josh is an inside the beltway guy who doesn't touch this sort of serious foreign policy/war expose/story, he sticks to the more inter-political stuff in America and usually GOP hypocrisy.

BTW "something from some right-wing conspiracy rag" would be more like:

"bin Laden died at Camp David from plastic surgery meant to alter his appearance, as secret Muslim Obama was going to change his identity and appoint him to the Supreme Court to institute Sharia Law frm the top"

Hersh had multiple sources including a Pak General, retired, who had already talked to al Jazeera, other US sources were retired or consultants, some of these guys love to talk apparently.

The main reason the right wing wouldn't touch this story:

1) They don't want to open anything to do with the Saudi/Pak can of worms, the GOP is tight with the King and have had at least as many dirty Saudi/Pak deals as Obama.

2) Nobody denies bin Laden is dead, and the GOP wants people to forget a Democrat got him.

3). The modus operandi of how we got him is irrelevant except for people like Hersh, or people who would read a 10,000 word essay, which is not a voter bloc the GOP seeks to exploit for votes.

Carlotta Gall seems to

PeraclesPlease — Tue, 12 May 2015 23:23:16 +0000

In reply to I chalk it down to cognitive

Carlotta Gall seems to corroborate in the NY Times. My guess is Hersh isn't that far out on a limb

Odd, why hasn't Josh Marshall

Michael Wolraich — Tue, 12 May 2015 19:31:39 +0000

In reply to I chalk it down to cognitive

Odd, why hasn't Josh Marshall even mentioned this story?