Skip to comments.Pentagon: Hersh report 'journalist malpractice'
Posted on 05/17/2004 10:54:39 AM PDT by tvn
NEW YORK (CNN) -- Officials in the Pentagon and the U.S. intelligence community Monday flatly denied a New Yorker magazine report that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld approved a clandestine unit to crack down on terrorists held at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, where inmates were abused.
The article, by Seymour Hersh, quotes a former intelligence official saying the unit's instructions were, "Grab whom you must. Do what you want." The report also says the CIA pulled its people from involvement in interrogations at the prison in October "because it was out of control."
"This is the most hysterical piece of journalist malpractice I have ever observed," said Lawrence DiRita, spokesman for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in response to Hersh's report.
A senior intelligence official said the article contains "fantasy," adding, "I haven't found any truth in it."
The unit described simply does not exist, the intelligence official said...
Hersh, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his story on the My Lai massacre in Vietnam, said he had fewer than half a dozen sources for his report but more than two. And "more than a few in the CIA" know about the the agency's pullout from Abu Ghraib, he said.
Secretary of State Colin Powell said Sunday he had read a summary of the New Yorker article and stressed that all war prisoners should be treated humanely. "I haven't read the article and I don't know anything about the substance of the article," Powell said. "I have just seen a quick summary of it. So I will have to yield to the Defense Department to respond."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Meaning that Hersh has 3, 4 or 5 sources making stuff up.
Or that he's making up 3, 4 or 5 sources...
Three, to be exact. His head. His a**. And his dog.
Here's a guess...Alan Foley, Mr. & Mrs. Wilson, ____________
or, perhaps that Hershwas set up..(G).he was fed this by someone who knew he'd jump on it like a starving dog on a bone, without checking..
" more than two.
You mean, perhaps by somebody in the Senate who'd somehow received a copy of the report before Rumsfeld...?
Hersh's sources could be named "me, myself and I". That's more than 2 and less than 6.
The deeply unfortnately thing is that, unlike all other organizations in the country, only media organizations are all but totally immune from civil or criminal legal proceedings thanks to the overly generous interpretation by the courts of the First Amendment's freedom-of-the-press clause.
Seymore Hersch = Seymore Butts
What was Hersh writing about during the 8 years of the Clintons ?
The only people who can be surprised that Hersh is pitching manure again are those who haven't seen him pitch it before.
And a FORMER official would be in the loop how? < sarcasm> "Former official" also implies a Clintonite, now there's areal good reliable source for ya, they would never stoop to lying, all the while putting our troops at risk, just to win an election !< /sarcasm>
You could be right ...Seymour Hersh, has published a large number of credible investgations over many years and I trust his writing more then most. Usually his sources in Mil and Intel are excellent. I doubt he has an agenda to politically slam Bush..
So in my mind either this story has some inkling of truth or he was setup royal....
I believe you and I have different spins on the term "set up"..
"Here's a guess...Alan Foley, Mr. & Mrs. Wilson, ____________"
May I add Walter Pincus to your list?
Hmmmm. Hersh claims to have current and past intelligence sources.
I bet two months pay that one of these so-called sources is Joe Wilson's wife, you know, the Clinton flacky who screamed bloody murder when Novak confirmed (everybody already knew) that she was in the CIA.
I am quite sure she would say ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to tarnish President Bush and Sec.Def Rumsfield, no matter how libelous or how much she had to make up.
Hersh will never reveal his source, so she is safe.
So that takes care of Hersh's "current intelligence source". As for the "past govt source," that could be any one of a thousand Clintonoids, every one of whom would make up phony claims about Sec. Rumsfield or President Bush in a Clinton-orgasmic minute.
You mean "incredible", do you not?
Here is an example of Hersh's so-called credibility.
In other words, he has none.
Check out National Review's recent article which documents the blatant lies and crap Hersh has printed over the years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.