US version of Osamas death-not true

[mapuc]

Via a Swedish news page I found this English article by Seymour M. Hersh

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n10/seymour...sama-bin-laden

The most blatant lie was that Pakistan’s two most senior military leaders – General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, chief of the army staff, and General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, director general of the ISI – were never informed of the US mission

To be honest, I don't know what to believe. Is US version the right one or is Seymour right in his accusation ?

Markus

[Harvs]

Just read this on news.com.au, maybe someones Bin Fibbin

[Jeff-Groves]

Osama was living under an assumed name.
Osama Bin A Hiddin

[mapuc]

I don't feel like reading a book - does someone have a tl;dr maybe?

[CCIP]

I'm not surprised. Pakistan's intelligence services are incredibly shady and have a very unstraightforward role in all of this. In many ways, I also feel that they've been manipulating the situation with Al Quaeda and Taliban, drone strikes and Chinese interests, and other happenings on their territory for a while to advance their own powers. Managing tensions and playing both sides at the same time.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by CCIP

I'm not surprised. Pakistan's intelligence services are incredibly shady and have a very unstraightforward role in all of this. In many ways, I also feel that they've been manipulating the situation with Al Quaeda and Taliban, drone strikes and Chinese interests, and other happenings on their territory for a while to advance their own powers. Managing tensions and playing both sides at the same time.

Sounds like every government on earth to me.

[Subnuts]

Eh, I'm a fan of the Australian version.

[Wolferz]

Probably made the fish sick.

[Bilge_Rat]

If it was anyone other than Seymour Hersh, this story would not be getting the same play. The WH is denying it, but Hersh made his rep by uncovering stories the U.S. Govt. wanted kept under wraps (i.e My Lai, Abu Ghraib).

What I find interesting is the reaction of the mainstream media, instead of saying: "Hey, there is a story here we should re-look into", they are all following the WH line and trying to destroy Hersh's credibility.

Problem is the same story was reported before by other journalists using different sources:

R.J. Hillhouse, a former professor, Fulbright fellow and novelist whose writing on intelligence and military outsourcing has appeared in the Washington Post and New York Times, made the same main assertions in 2011 about the death of Osama bin Laden as Seymour Hersh’s new story in the London Review of Books — apparently based on different sources than those used by Hersh.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2...erent-sources/

Hillhouse made the same basic points back in aug. 2011, but the story was ignored at the time:

On August 7, 2011, I wrote, among other things:

• The US cover story of how they found bin Laden was fiction
• OBL was turned in by a walk-in informant, a mid-level ISI officer seeking to claim $25 million under the "Rewards for Justice" program.
• The Pakistani Intelligence Service -- ISI -- was sheltering bin Laden
• Saudi cash was financing the ISI operation keeping bin Laden captive
• The US presented an ultimatum to Pakistan that they would lose US funding if they did not cooperate with a US operation against bin Laden
• Pakistani generals Kiyani and Pasha were involved in the US operation that killed OBL
• Pakistan pulled out its troops from the area of Abottabad to facilitate the American raid
• The Obama administration betrayed the cooperating Pakistani officials
• The Obama administration scrambled to explain the crashed helicopter when their original drone strike cover story collapsed

At the time, American media largely ignored the story which was picked up around the world, from London and Sydney, to Istanbul and Islamabad.
The Hersh story makes all of the points described in my 2011 pieces. The Spy Who Billed Me redux.

http://www.thespywhobilledme.com/the...-up-story.html

Now there is a political angle to all this. If it turns out Obama lied about what really happened, then that means his Secretary of State at the time, one mrs. Clinton, also lied. hmmmm.

[donna52522]

Bin Laden was taken out, that's all I care about. I don't care who did it and/or how it was done.

[Aktungbby]

The CIA never gets it right! They bagged Eichhörnchen by mistake!

High-level lying nevertheless remains the modus operandi of US policy, along with secret prisons, drone attacks, Special Forces night raids, bypassing the chain of command, and cutting out those who might say no.

Every one back to bed; Business as usual...

[Wolferz]

To the old adage...

Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see!
Especially if the source is politicians or the media outlets in their pockets.

[Catfish]

And, those are only some facts that have been found out by chance and seldomly made investigations .. imagine what goes by unnoticed.
I even doubt that Bin Laden himself said he was behind 9/11. The text he speaks in this video is said to mean something completely different.

And is he really dead? Resist always.

Not that i really think the secret services were at it .. but capable of executing such a coup? Anytime. Think of middle and South America and US american involvement (Pinochet, Noriega and lots of others..)

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Catfish

I even doubt that Bin Laden himself said he was behind 9/11.

I doubt very much he directly was, if he had any co-ordination in the attack it was probably just to give it his blessing. I certainly doubt he directly drew it up, but left it to his underlings to get the job done.
He didn't strike me as a Hitler-style meddling leader, but one who let those under his command do things how they wished so long as the job got done.