Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
I haven't looked at this, but I'm guessing it's complete bull**** based on what I've read about the Syrain attacks.
To be fair, a good bit of the Syrian Chemical attack denial is coming from the left.
Seems I guessed right.
Here's an overview of Hersh's omissions. (Cliffs: His story about the intelligence the Russians gave the US doesn't match the Russian story post-attack.)
I think Hersh is very wrong--there's independent evidence that Sarin was used.
What's going on with this story then?
I don't know. It's weird. Did Hersh just make up a source in the US government? Did he get duped by Russia? Or by somebody intent on making Trump look dumb? Or by some Russia-sympathetic adviser in the Trump administration?
That last one is scary--and I was going to say it's a long shot, but The Welt makes this note:
Quote:
As has always been his practice, Hersh has told Welt am Sonntag the identities of all the sources he quotes anonymously in his story about Trump's retaliatory strike against Syria. The paper was thus able to speak independently to the central source in the U.S.
Note that they only talked to
one of the sources.
This is fascinating to me. The things the source says make no sense. But the editor checked out Hersh's source, which makes it less likely it's an outright fabrication. Still seems like a sloppy cover-up job by the Russians.