Seymour Hersh, of course. Listening to this man go on on the O’Reilly Show tonight about how being photographed naked is a bigger insult to a Muslim man than having his hand cut off (as if Hersh would know or as if all Muslim men were the same) and therefore only a “higher up” would know enough to have ordered this indignity at Abu Ghraib, is like listening to a 19th century Snake Oil Salesman sell scam remedies for rheumatism. (As if this kind of behavior is not a frequent occurence in prisons throughout the world). Shame on Hersh, shame on The New Yorker and shame on all of us for allowing this man to sell his vague accusations, almost always based on unnamed intelligence sources who obviously are whispering in his ear in order to screw their buddies. In this post-Rather Internet Age of serious fact-checking the Hersh’s of the world had better start backing up their “inside” stories with verifiable facts and documents or their names and their fat books will be worthless.
Ask these people:
September 13, 2004
POLICE IN NAJAF HAVE FOUND THE BODIES OF 200 MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN A MASS GRAVE. THESE CIVILIANS WERE TORTURED AND KILLED BY ORDERS OF THE SHARI’A (ISLAMIC LAW) COURT ESTABLISHED BY REBEL MUQTADA AL-SADR WHILE HE WAS IN CONTROL OF THE CITY. (AL-ZAMAN, BAGHDAD/LONDON, 9/13/04)
http://www.memri.org/ticker.html
Man, just think of the story he would have had if Calley brought his girlfriend’s underwear with him.
OT, but hie thee over to Cap’n Ed where the original spot report on Kerry’s Silver Star has been posted.
Wasn’t the word “bullshit” in the title an hour ago? What happened? Bring back bullshit!
That’s CBS News’s new motto, btw.
Seymour Hersch. Made his name as a young leftist reporter when the My Lai massacre story was dropped into his lap. Has been looking desperately for a repeat ever since, and thinks he found it in Abu Ghraib. A despicable and dangerous gossip-monger in the guise of an investigative reporter.
See this, from a transcript of a 2003 CNN interview with Perle on the subject of Hersch ( http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/03/03/10_perle.html ):
PERLE: Look, Sy Hersh is the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist, frankly.
BLITZER: Well, on the basis of — why do you say that? A terrorist?
PERLE: Because he’s widely irresponsible. If you read the article, it’s first of all, impossible to find any consistent theme in it. But the suggestion that my views are somehow related for the potential for investments in homeland defense is complete nonsense.
BLITZER: But I don’t understand. Why do you accuse him of being a terrorist?
PERLE: Because he sets out to do damage and he will do it by whatever innuendo, whatever distortion he can — look, he hasn’t written a serious piece since My Lai.
I refuse to pay any attention to Hersch.
My guess is there will be a dozen investigations into this before all is said and done.It is notr as if it were being ignored.
If truth were told I doubt those pictures would be floating around if the military had actually ordered this thing.
O’Reilley has slipped like crazy. I was an early FOX watcher and he used to be terrific, now he is on both sides of everything important other than smallpox and atomic bombs. He has become the LA Times of FOX, always equivicating and always couching his opinions in maybe. Not worth watching any more.
Hersch always looks and sounds like a pussycat and “seems” honest and likeable. Today everybody lies and only the bloggers stand by to expose them. CBS, like the rest of the media, is simply partisan Democrat. Period. End of story.
I saw the same Bill OíReilly interview with Seymour Hersh. My jaw almost dropped to the ground when he said that the soldiers at Abu Ghraib were essentially too uneducated to think of posing the prisoners in such a humiliating manner. How naive can Hersh be? That has got to be one of the dumbest things Iíve ever heard in my life.
And yes, Bill OíReilly is getting goofier than a fruit cake. He so badly wants to be perceived as fair and balanced that his brains are starting to turn to mush. Last night he had the audacity to say that the experts havenít really made up their minds concerning the Sixty Minutes documents. Recently he even claimed that there are few real difference between George W. Bush and John Kerry regarding the war on terror.
Well, Seymour Hesch is taken as a very serious journalist around the world. This is the problem with most of the people like him, they are presented as “experts” and “knowledgeable” in other countries media, where they can give their views unopposed, since they are “unbiased experts”.
The latest I’ve seen with Hersh was in one of the major papers here a few days ago, it’s about his new book and the special commando SAP:
http://www.aftonbladet.se/vss/nyheter/story/0,2789,532533,00.html
It’s basically a short version of his new book, and he’s held up as one of the most well known journalists in the US, and the contents of his book is more or less presented as facts. It also says The Guardian is printing excerpts, so he has big impact with what he does.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1303296,00.html
I also saw him presented as a “top journalist” that “discovered My Lai and Abu Ghraib”, and is presented as a very accurate and honest source.
I’ve seen Noam Chomsky, Michael Moore and that british guy that got beat up in Pakistan presented in the same way. And there’s really no balance here, there’s no other side presented. They stand unopposed, as “experts”, and noone is presented to refute what they say.