• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

"Cheney's Assassination Ring"

Allen773 said:
You have to use anonymous sources to get the truth.

Hersh is one of the best journalists around.
Click to expand...

I have it from many anonymous sources that Obama is in fact a socialist, Marxist, Muslim who plans on turning America into a dictatorship that only he will rule.

My sources also tell me that 9/11 was an inside job, that we did not land on the moon, that the moon is in fact made of cheese, and that Bigfoot is really W in disguise.

It's true!
 
Cicero said:
But unlike Dan Rather, who relied on obvious forgeries for his entire Bush 43 National Guard story, Hersch did not use the Lawrence Cusack Kennedy papers in "Darkside,"
Click to expand...

No. The difference between Rather and Hersh isn't that Hersh didn't use the forgeries, it's that he wasn't too stupid torecognize when someone else proved they were forgeries. Luckily for him it also happened before he went to print. But the comparison only damns Rather, it doesn't rescue Hersh.

Hersch is a Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist
Click to expand...

So was Walter Durranty.

but when he goes after JFK it is just a hiccup in his credibility?
Click to expand...

Frankly, the whole JFK mess is NOT actually one of the cases of Hersh's unreliability I care much about (I wasn't the one who brought it up), it's just one of the more obvious ones. Like I said, you're barking up the wrong tree, because I don't care that he attacked JFK. There's plenty JFK deserved criticism for.
 
Could a mod please split the JFK derail to it's own thread? Although it does speak to Hersch's credibility, it is only marginally relevant to the thread.
 
gdnp said:
Could a mod please split the JFK derail to it's own thread? Although it does speak to Hersch's credibility, it is only marginally relevant to the thread.
Click to expand...

Boo f'in hoo. Hersh's JFK book proves even a blind squirrel can root up a chestnut. While his story on Cheney is still in the rough, Hersh can deliver the goods and "Dark Side Of Camelot" proves this.
 
Cicero said:
Boo f'in hoo. Hersh's JFK book proves even a blind squirrel can root up a chestnut. While his story on Cheney is still in the rough, Hersh can deliver the goods and "Dark Side Of Camelot" proves this.
Click to expand...

Not having read the book, I can't really critique it. This is not, however, a line I would like to have in a review of a book I had written:
Hersh claims his evidence is both new and substantiated. But, to paraphrase Dr. Johnson, much of what can be substantiated in this book is not new, and much of what is new, including his most sensational findings, cannot be substantiated.
Click to expand...
 
Cobalt said:
I have it from many anonymous sources that Obama is in fact a socialist, Marxist, Muslim who plans on turning America into a dictatorship that only he will rule.

My sources also tell me that 9/11 was an inside job, that we did not land on the moon, that the moon is in fact made of cheese, and that Bigfoot is really W in disguise.

It's true!
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:
 
Cicero said:
But apparently for you, not the criticisms found in Hersh's book? If we dismiss those, what's left?
Click to expand...

Jeez. How many times do I have to say this? I'm not defending JFK. This isn't about JFK.
 
Cobalt said:
I have it from many anonymous sources that Obama is in fact a socialist, Marxist, Muslim who plans on turning America into a dictatorship that only he will rule.

My sources also tell me that 9/11 was an inside job, that we did not land on the moon, that the moon is in fact made of cheese, and that Bigfoot is really W in disguise.

It's true!
Click to expand...

Why has no-one thought to equate 911 skepticism with moon landing skepticism and Bigfoot before?

Sheer genius!
 
gdnp said:
Not having read the book, I can't really critique it. This is not, however, a line I would like to have in a review of a book I had written:
Click to expand...

Something you need never worry about considering any book you might be able to cobble together would be fiction anyway.

Just because Epstein's opinion that Hersch's new material isn't substantiated doesn't make it true.

Epstein's own 1966 "Inquest: The Warren Commission and the Establishment of Truth" is a model of unsubstantiated claims.
 
JihadJane said:
Why has no-one thought to equate 911 skepticism with moon landing skepticism and Bigfoot before?

Sheer genius!
Click to expand...
The W is Bigfoot bit is actually less insane than a lot of truther theories.
 
Ziggurat said:
Jeez. How many times do I have to say this? I'm not defending JFK. This isn't about JFK.
Click to expand...

Dismissing the material in Hersch's book out of hand is what JFK apologists have done since the book came out in 1997. So you can see why I might confuse you with the other apologists.
 
I have recently discovered that Seymour Hersh was responsible for the assassination of Paul Wellstone, using modified flying attack baboons.

Unfortunately it will be a couple years before I can present my evidence in book form. Till then just take my word for it, okay?
 
Oliver said:
Oh, and Kucinich stepping up to the plate ...
Click to expand...

Yeah, um... that doesn't help Hersh's credibility. But I liked this quote:
"Mr. Hersh is within a year or more of releasing a book that is said to include evidence of this allegation."

I'm within a year or more of making a billionaire dollars selling toilet plunger doilies. And becoming the first person to scale Mt. Everest in only my underwear. And translating Shakespeare into Klingon. And writing a book that provides photographic evidence of Hersh snorting paprika from Obama's navel.
 
Oliver said:
I wonder if Hersh was talking about Task Force 121 carrying out assassinations.
Click to expand...


If he was (and you may be right) he's wrong on two counts. This task force (it seems it keeps changing its name for opsec reasons) is operating under CENTCOM so to say it operates without oversight is simple nonsense. Secondly, it's a combat unit involved in very specific combat operations. There's nothing wrong with trying to kill enemy leaders in war. It's smart.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom