Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Political Discussion
Reply to "Is the "Bin Laden Raid" Story Fake?"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous][quote=jsteele]The New York Times Magazine has a new article out confirming much of Hersh's reporting: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/12/magazine/the-detail-in-seymour-hershs-bin-laden-story-that-rings-true.html Most importantly, this author of this article has independent sources telling him that Pakistan did have bin Laden under house arrest and that he was turned in to the US by a Pakistani. What that means is that the entire "Zero Dark Thirty" story about tracking a courier was a myth. Torture played no role. [/quote] Wow, Jeff, your summary of Carlotta Gall's blog post (not a NYT magazine article btw) is pretty deceptive (and another btw, she's a she, not a him as you seem to presume) . Gall explicitly states "I cannot confirm Hersh’s bolder claims — for example, that two of Pakistan’s top generals, Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, the former army chief, and Ahmed Shuja Pasha, the director of the ISI, had advance knowledge of the raid. But I would not necessarily dismiss the claims immediately." Which means that one NYT reporter believes some aspects of Hersh's story, but not others. That's hardly confirmation. [/quote] You got me on the gender. I had confused the author with someone else (going by last name). But, I wrote that "much" was confirmed. You agree that "some" was confirmed. We can debate that difference between "much" and "some", but I doubt that you will disagree that Gall confirmed the two most important points: 1) bin Laden was under house arrest, not hiding; 2) bin Laden's location was revealed by a "walk in" rather than through US intelligence efforts. If those two points are true, whether or not two generals knew about it hardly matters. Out of curiosity, why did you write your post in the manner that you did? Are you simply taking the opportunity to jump on me, or are you trying to dismiss Hersh? I mean, seriously, you called my post "pretty deceptive" because I got the author's gender wrong and we may disagree about the difference between "much" and "some'? What's that all about? [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics