International News
See other International News Articles
Title: The Killing of Osama bin Laden: Seymour M. Hersh’s Most Important Article
Source:
LRC
URL Source: https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blo ... hershs-most-important-article/
Published: May 11, 2015
Author: Michael S. Rozeff
Post Date: 2015-05-11 19:44:05 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 2634
Comments: 15
Seymour M. Hersh has published a blockbuster article on events surrounding bin Laden’s life and death in Pakistan. You need to know that ISI is Pakistan Inter-Services Intelligence. Here are a few of the revelations. 1. Bin Laden hid in the Hindu Kush mountains between 2001-2006. Payoffs by the ISI to informants led to his discovery. After 2006, the ISI seized him and placed him in the compound at Abbottabad where he was murdered by the American team. They supplied him with a doctor, Amir Aziz, and kept tabs on him. Bin Laden was under constant ISI observation. The ISI has a covert base 15 minutes away by helicopter. In addition, a Pakistan army battalion headquarters is about a mile away. 2. Bin Laden was very ill, an invalid. Saudi Arabia financed bin Laden’s upkeep. Both the ISI and Saudis had good reasons to keep this information from the Americans. The ISI wanted a quid pro quo from the U.S. They also held a stick against the Saudis. The Saudis didn’t want the U.S. to know because then they’d pressure Pakistan to get bin Laden to reveal the money links between the Saudi’s large scale support of al Qaeda. The Saudis also had a stick. If they did reveal Pakistan’s knowledge of bin Laden, this would cause a political furor and interrupt the large U.S. aid to Pakistan and to the ISI in particular. 3. The ISI knew every detail of the proposed raid and influenced its shape and form. They required bin Laden to be slain. This was to prevent him from talking and revealing the Pakistani role in hiding him. 4. The U.S. learned of bin Laden’s whereabouts from a walk-in in August 2010, a man who tipped the CIA off, in order to get the large $25 million reward. He was a former senior ISI intelligence officer. 5. The U.S. turned off the money spigot to Pakistan to get the ISI to agree to the raid without any interference from Pakistan’s defense systems or military. 6. The ISI used bin Laden as a hostage in order to influence al Qaeda and Taliban operations. The ISI wanted to prevent operations against its interests. 7. The story of bin Laden going for an AK-47 is a fabrication. He was murdered. The team going in knew that it would be a homicide. There was no firefight. There was no armed resistance of any kind. The assassins were guided to his room and murdered him and not just with one or two bullets. 8. The White House account of the entire episode is riddled with one lie after another. There was, for example, no treasure trove of computers or documents found and taken from the compound. 9. Bin Laden’s remains were not flown to a U.S. ship and buried at sea. That story is a total fabrication. His remains, what was left after their near total destruction by gunfire, were flown to Afghanistan. Body parts were tossed into the mountains. 10. Zero Dark Thirty is fiction. Poster Comment: Nice summary of the key points in Hersh's recent piece.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: TooConservative (#0)
This entire article is fiction - Osama died in 2001. FOX News - Report: Bin Laden Already Dead December 26, 2001
That's rich, coming from you. How do you know that your version is more accurate? After all, everything is a conspiracy against the public according to you. Why isn't your version the conspiracy's propaganda product? Anyway, this is the current debunking of that public relations farce we experienced with the whole cabinet assembled in the WH situation room with Obola only leaving his precious golf outing to join them to listen as Leon Panetta directed operations from the Pentagon. It all looked as phony to me as when Xlinton trotted out Hitlery and his entire cabinet to vouch for his truthfulness after he told us "I never had sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky." It was a set piece performance. National security really is not conducted that way. It was like some comedic re-enactment of the Pentagon situation room scenes in Dr. Strangelove. Hersh has been hit-or-miss over the decades but he has broken his share of major stories, more in past decades than in recent ones. However, I think he may have something here. I am interested to see how the story develops.
This rings more true than the zero dark thirty bullshit.
That was mostly why I found it interesting. And all the mad scrambling from the usual mouthpieces and various spooks. Truthfully, now that we've had a few days to look at Hersh's story, it has as many problems as any other version of the OBL saga. So I think Hersh maybe got taken in by a lone anonymous source. And this isn't the first time that's happened with a major Hersh story in recent decades.
Well just as Hersh is pushing his story Angela whatever her name is - she is married to the former Fed reserve chairman - forget her name - is on now with their version of reality that does support Hersh's version in some regard but she goes out of her way to debunk the rest stating her evidence does not show this or that. So if the US govt is leaking counter stories via the approved press then there is something to Hersh's version of the truth.
Hersh's reports that the claim by the Obots ,that OBL was given an Islamic burial aboard the Carl Vinson was false . According to Hersh ,OBL was jettisoned over the Hindu Kush. This is not the first time I've heard that version. Larry Johnson @ No Quarter ,and other sources made that claim days after the raid. I have never heard of any confirmation of the burial story . My only problem is that if this was a fabrication by the White House ,they had an awful lot of people in on the plot to deceive . I know that Rob O'Neill ,the purported 'Seal who killed Bin Laden' is calling the Hersh report ludicrous.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Yeah, I saw him too. Something about him makes me think he's a serial liar too but he had his points to make. Of course, most of the SEALs that went on the OBL raid are dead, killed in that Chinook copter that was taken out at takeoff by a close grenade launcher.
I was thinking more in line with the Vinson ,being a Nimitz class carrier ;has on board 6,000 potential witnesses. The problem with most conspiracies is that there are a whole lot of people that have to be kept in line .
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
yup. We are asked by a known proven liar to believe his little glory story yet the con artist has provided not a single picture or any physical evidence. Osama was supposedly murdered, then thrown off of a boat at sea. Uh huh. Not a single picture of anyone on the boat? There was no problem when the media plastered photos of Saddam's sons all over. It's lie after lie after lie. If you haven't seen these they are worth a watch. Youtube keeps deleting the first one. Here's a neighbor Bhutto about a month before assassination - BBC edits original clip The explosive Paul Craig Roberts Interview- PCR: "The American People are Gullible, Gullible, Gullible!" Abbottabad residents: Operation of killing Bin Laden a hoax
I found it interesting that the LRC crew is divided on this. Here's an interesting piece. Under this hypothesis, the raid is taken to be a complete hoax. How does that explain the surviving family members making comments about the raid? Under that theory, the sources that Hersh used have to be liars and he has to be wrong in thinking that they are valid. This theory must then explain these implications. The theory must also explain why, if bin Laden were dead, the U.S. government would have denied it. It has to explain why the government chose the time it did to perpetrate a risky hoax, especially since the uncovering of the hoax would be damaging. What great benefits would such a hoax bring. and could not such benefits be obtained in other less risky ways? And if such a hoax were attempted, would it not have been better planned with the cover stories all pre-arranged? Now we have an alternative conspiracy theory, which is the one proposed by Hersh. This theory must answer to fewer questions and fewer serious challenges. It is internally consistent and explains a good many facts and ambiguities, some of which have existed from the outset and gibe with earlier news reports. I never bought into Roberts’ theory in the first place, but I didn’t express my opinion about it. I thought it was implausible even though we knew he was ill. Bin Laden was born in 1957. He was 44 years old in 2001. An early demise from his ailments seemed unlikely. He could afford good medical care. Had he died of natural causes, the news would probably have leaked out. There were some reports of his activity after the date of his supposed death. All in all, his death in 2001 or thereabouts seemed unlikely to me because of considerations like these and others. Hersh’s article makes this theory even less plausible. We constantly devise theories and choose among them. This is required in this case. This comment is nowhere near a complete explanation of what criteria we should or do use in choosing or in assigning probabilities to alternative theories. Each criterion requires a ceteris paribus proviso — other things equal. Occam’s Razor is frequently invoked as a criterion: choose the simplest or most parsimonious explanation, one that requires the fewest and least problematic assumptions. Of course, choose the theory that explains more of the phenomena. A better theory will have some implications not previously thought of that when looked at are true. It is said to be richer. One wants a theory to build upon assumptions or postulates that are correct, if at all possible. This is not always known for sure. The fewer the leaps of faith in the postulates, the better. Simplicity, explanatory power, richness, and correctness of assumptions are a few criteria. Another is lack of ambiguity, or that the theory is clear or strong in some sense. People have other ideas about theories, such as here and here. There is controversy over the subject of what makes a good theory. I mean only to open the door, if it needs to be open for some lay readers who haven’t thought about this before or been exposed to how scientists think about and use theories. The internet is chock full of theories. Everyone needs ways of choosing among them.
Bin Laden being sick is probably true - a helicopter crashes inside his yard and he did not reach for a gun until after the SEAL team was in his room? Not releasing the autopsy pictures also makes more sense now because he probably was shot in his bed or wheel chair multiple times as the Hersh article states. Stealth is bullshit - makes us think the choppers were invisible. The Pakis held Bin Laden till the gig was up. Bin Laden was under house arrest basically. He was not in command and control of much. The Paki ISI used OBL as an asset. The USA probably knew also or did not care because OBL brought in the mother load of contracts. The GOP and the Dems loved the war on terror.
Obviously, a very weak point in the standard account. The few armed men and OBL should have been ready at choke points with full-auto weapons. Yet they were not.
Obviously, a very weak point in the standard account. The few armed men and OBL should have been ready at choke points with full-auto weapons. Yet they were not. Also, having the president watching the action - that is BS to me - not that he was not watching but that the WH/Pentagon/CIA would expose the president to a viewing a potential military failure. I don't know if Obama was in on it or was he like one of these suburban great white hunters who go to ranches in the west and shoot tame deer or rams so that the great hunter behind the comfortable blind can take his trophy shot and Obama was there to view an action that was 'already in the bag' as a photo op. Maybe the the Paki ISI killed OBL the night before? Posioned him? Shot him up close and the SEAL team was brought in to take out the body in a dramatic way and take the credit? What is true is that the Pakistani sons of bitches and the Saudis are the fucking ones who backed these terrorists assets and played us at both ends and could do so because of some weird middle eastern cultural trait that allows them to be both your allies and your enemies at the same time.
I think that in event of failure, he would have snuck back to the golf course and never admitted he was even in the Situation Room. Then the cabinet would take the blame. C'mon, you know what manipulative scumbags these people are. Of course that was their plan.
Then the cabinet would take the blame. C'mon, you know what manipulative scumbags these people are. Of course that was their plan. Because staffers leak like a bad lawn's faucet this is too risky. They could always stage a photo of them looking at a some sort of viewer screen but again leaks that they were looking at a blank screen is too real.
10. Zero Dark Thirty is fiction.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Americans who have no experience with, or knowledge of, tyranny believe that only terrorists will experience the unchecked power of the state. They will believe this until it happens to them, or their children, or their friends.
Paul Craig Roberts
#2. To: Deckard (#1)
This entire article is fiction - Osama died in 2001.
#3. To: TooConservative (#2)
#4. To: Pericles (#3)
(Edited)
This rings more true than the zero dark thirty bullshit.
#5. To: TooConservative (#4)
That was mostly why I found it interesting. And all the mad scrambling from the usual mouthpieces and various spooks.
#6. To: TooConservative (#0)
#7. To: tomder55 (#6)
My only problem is that if this was a fabrication by the White House ,they had an awful lot of people in on the plot to deceive . I know that Rob O'Neill ,the purported 'Seal who killed Bin Laden' is calling the Hersh report ludicrous.
#8. To: TooConservative (#7)
Yeah, I saw him too. Something about him makes me think he's a serial liar too but he had his points to make
#9. To: Deckard (#1)
This entire article is fiction
#10. To: Deckard, Pericles, tomder55 (#1)
This entire article is fiction - Osama died in 2001.
A Brief Foray Into Sorting Out Theories
Michael S. Rozeff
Our colleague Paul Craig Roberts has proposed that bin Laden died years before the raid in Abbottabad in which he is said to have been shot to death. One can assemble a number of supporting facts or near-facts or interpretations of facts or near-facts in order to support this hypothesis or theory. A good many people no doubt assign a high probability of truth to this theory. I do not.
#11. To: TooConservative, Deckard, , tomder55 (#10)
#12. To: Pericles (#11)
Bin Laden being sick is probably true - a helicopter crashes inside his yard and he did not reach for a gun until after the SEAL team was in his room?
#13. To: TooConservative (#12)
(Edited)
Bin Laden being sick is probably true - a helicopter crashes inside his yard and he did not reach for a gun until after the SEAL team was in his room?
#14. To: Pericles (#13)
Also, having the president watching the action - that is BS to me - not that he was not watching but that the WH/Pentagon/CIA would expose the president to a viewing a potential military failure.
#15. To: TooConservative (#14)
Also, having the president watching the action - that is BS to me - not that he was not watching but that the WH/Pentagon/CIA would expose the president to a viewing a potential military failure. I think that in event of failure, he would have snuck back to the golf course and never admitted he was even in the Situation Room.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]