April 11, 2005
Sy Hersh: Truth Teller Or Serial Liar?
IIn the summer of '04 Ed Cone noted that in a speech Seymour Hersh described:
"...videotapes of boys being sodomized at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.Cone has the speech on livestream here and notes that Hersh begins at about 1:07:50. I listened to the whole thing just to make sure my reporting was accurate. Cone nailed it."The worst is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking," the reporter told an ACLU convention last week. Hersh says there was "a massive amount of criminal wrongdoing that was covered up at the highest command out there, and higher."
The only problem is is that the story isn't true. Hersh "pulled" at the truth so to speak. Cone then points to Chris Suellentrop's article in the New York Magazine Cone says that Suellentrop's article is a "not-very-flattering look" at Hersh. I'd say that is an understatement.
The lede passage from Suellentrop's article: "
Since the Abu Ghraib story broke eleven months ago, The New Yorker’s national-security correspondent, Seymour Hersh, has followed it up with a series of spectacular scoops. Videotape of young boys being raped at Abu Ghraib. Evidence that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi may be a “composite figure†and a propaganda creation of either Iraq’s Baathist insurgency or the U.S. government. The active involvement of Karl Rove and the president in “prisoner-interrogation issues.†The mysterious disappearance of $1 billion, in cash, in Iraq. A threat by the administration to a TV network to cut off access to briefings in retaliation for asking Laura Bush “a very tough question about abortion.†The Iraqi insurgency’s access to short-range FROG missiles that “can do grievous damage to American troops.†The murder, by an American platoon, of 36 Iraqi guards.Not one of these exclusives appeared in the pages of The New Yorker, however. Instead, Hersh delivered them in speeches on college campuses and in front of organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union and on public-radio shows like “Democracy Now!†In most cases, Hersh attaches a caveatâ€â€such as “I’m just talking now, I’m not writingâ€Ââ€â€before unloading one of his blockbusters, which can send bloggers and reporters scurrying for confirmation."
"I'm just talking..." In other words; "If I'm writing I'll always to try to tell the truth, but if I'm TALKING, welllll........."
Read the whole article. If that doesn't set you back on your haunches, I don't know what will. I've never particularly liked Hersh, looks as if my gut instinct was right all along.
Tip of the Chapeaux to Instapundit
Posted by GM Roper at April 11, 2005 12:49 PM | TrackBackI'm not sure that just because these reports haven't been published that makes him a 'serial liar'. He does have many contacts, and how do we know that he wasn't told what he said he was told?
Do you remember that second round of abu-ghraib torture pictures that was supposed to come out? The ones that were supposed to be much worse than the first round? Even Rumsfeld had to concede that these pictures were much worse than the first ones. There were dozens of these pictures, and they are now under lock and key by the pentagon. WE WERE TOLD 'GET READY FOR THESE PICTURES', and then it was like 'we don't have to show the american public anything.' You don't really hear about it, because the public generally doesn't care about torture. But I don't fault Hersh for suspecting that these things occured. Evidence is not always that easy to come up, especially when you are up against the pentagon.
P.S. I loved that picture of the eagle against the moon. WOW. I couldn't believe you were able to take that. That must have been a once in a lifetime shot.
++++++++++++
John, welcome to my blog and thanks for commenting. Yes, even liars sometimes tell the truth and vice versa. However, Hersh has noted that he "stretches" when he talks. He does have a lot of sources, that is acknowledged, he also trolls for sources and that leaves him wide open for someone with an agenda.
Thanks for the accolade about the eagle. Actually, though it does look like it, it was not shot in front of the moon. I used a Minolta Dimage F100 and held the lens to the eye piece of a 4 inch reflector spotting telescope in the off chance that I could get a shot of this magnificent bird that was seemingly so far away. What appears to be the moon, is actually rain clouds in the distance and the dark circlular effect around the "moon" like appearance is the interior of the telescope. But, it is a neat effect I think. And you are right, it was the shot of a lifetime. I'v sold a couple of them and I call it The Guardian.
Posted by John McNelis at April 13, 2005 01:06 PM
