• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh describes 'executive assassination ring'

ADK_Forever

ADK_Forever

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
3,706
Reaction score
1,001
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Investigative journalist Sy Hersh dropped a bombshell revelation on Monday about international killings ordered under Bush.

“Yuh. After 9/11, I haven’t written about this yet, but the Central Intelligence Agency was very deeply involved in domestic activities against people they thought to be enemies of the state. Without any legal authority for it. They haven’t been called on it yet. That does happen.

"Right now, today, there was a story in the New York Times that if you read it carefully mentioned something known as the Joint Special Operations Command -- JSOC it’s called. It is a special wing of our special operations community that is set up independently. They do not report to anybody, except in the Bush-Cheney days, they reported directly to the Cheney office. They did not report to the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff or to Mr. [Robert] Gates, the secretary of defense. They reported directly to him. ...

"Congress has no oversight of it. It’s an executive assassination ring essentially, and it’s been going on and on and on. Just today in the Times there was a story that its leaders, a three star admiral named [William H.] McRaven, ordered a stop to it because there were so many collateral deaths.

"Under President Bush’s authority, they’ve been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. That’s been going on, in the name of all of us.

"It’s complicated because the guys doing it are not murderers, and yet they are committing what we would normally call murder. It’s a very complicated issue. Because they are young men that went into the Special Forces. The Delta Forces you’ve heard about. Navy Seal teams. Highly specialized.

"In many cases, they were the best and the brightest. Really, no exaggerations. Really fine guys that went in to do the kind of necessary jobs that they think you need to do to protect America. And then they find themselves torturing people.

"I’ve had people say to me -- five years ago, I had one say: ‘What do you call it when you interrogate somebody and you leave them bleeding and they don’t get any medical committee and two days later he dies. Is that murder? What happens if I get before a committee.?’

"But they’re not gonna get before a committee.”
Click to expand...
Seymour Hersh: "Executive Assassination Ring" Answered to Cheney, Had No Congressional Oversight | Rights and Liberties | AlterNet

This is a very interesting read, even for those of you who don't think you need to read links before you comment on them.

As I have said, as time goes by more and more will come out about how corrupt and treasonist the Bush administration was.

If this is true, hopefully we'll see Dickie indicted on charges also. This is quite against the law.

Have we ever had such a corrupt bunch of goons running our country?
 
You had two different thread titles to pick from, and still decided to make up your own? Follow the BN rules from now on.

MinnPost - Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh describes 'executive assassination ring'

And here's the CIA's response:

MinnPost - The CIA responds to Seymour Hersh (via MinnPost)

CIA spokester Little emailed me:

"I saw your story on Seymour Hersh’s recent allegations regarding CIA activities since 9/11. If you wish, you can attribute the quoted portion that follows to me, in name, as a CIA spokesman:

'This is utter nonsense.'"

I spoke to Little to clarify whether he was aware of the basis for Hersh's statement (which I am not, only that it's based on his reporting) or whether he was categorically stating that nothing the CIA has done post-9/11 could be reasonably characterized as domestic activities against people they thought to be enemies of the state. He said it was a categorical denial. He doesn't know what Hersh claims, but any claim that the CIA has engaged in domestic spying is "complete and utter nonsense," saith Little on behalf of the CIA.
Click to expand...

And remember folks, this is the same Sy Hersh who broke the story that the US was invading Iran and would use nuclear weapons. He's such a good reporter that he managed to break the story twice, once in 2006 and again in 2008.

Damn he's good.
 
No offense intended here, but isn't this more of a CT thread than a BN thread?
 
RightinNYC said:
You had two different thread titles to pick from, and still decided to make up your own? Follow the BN rules from now on.
Click to expand...

I looked for other threads but, didn't see any. Is your sarcasm always necessary in your role as a moderator? I mean, really? You could have merged mine in with one of the others or pm'd me and I would have deleted mine.
 
ADK_Forever said:
I looked for other threads but, didn't see any. Is your sarcasm always necessary in your role as a moderator? I mean, really? You could have merged mine in with one of the others or pm'd me and I would have deleted mine.
Click to expand...

I meant that you had two different options to choose from in picking what to title your thread, either the title at alternet or the title at minnpost. Despite that, you went your own way and just made one up, contrary to the BN guidelines.

Don't worry, you're the first one to post on this.
 
RightinNYC said:
I meant that you had two different options to choose from in picking what to title your thread, either the title at alternet or the title at minnpost. Despite that, you went your own way and just made one up, contrary to the BN guidelines.
Click to expand...

Actually, I did look over the rules re: Starting A Thread and found nothing re: the Thread Title. This is all I found:
17. Starting a Thread: When starting a thread it is best to express your own thoughts in your own words. Threads w/o original content may be summarily closed.

It's fitting, fine, well, and good that the initial, thread-starting post (called the thread's Original Post- OP for short) quotes another person or document. References, particularly in matters of fact, are encouraged. But they are no substitute for your own thoughts in your own words.

Using your own words in your OP encourages participation. By starting the conversation with a contribution of your own time and effort, you show potential participants you are serious in your intention to engage in dialogue. It says that if they reply to your posts, you are likely to respond to theirs.
Click to expand...

Please post what I'm missing.
 
Lerxst said:
No offense intended here, but isn't this more of a CT thread than a BN thread?
Click to expand...

Actually, this is a hastily-tossed-together-eye-popping-headline-train-wreck of a thread intended to distract attention from another thread in which the OP was utterly pnwed.

:rofl
 
“Yuh. After 9/11, I haven’t written about this yet, but the Central Intelligence Agency was very deeply involved in domestic activities against people they thought to be enemies of the state. Without any legal authority for it. They haven’t been called on it yet. That does happen.
Click to expand...

ADK_Forever said:
Investigative journalist Sy Hersh dropped a bombshell revelation on Monday about international killings ordered under Bush.


Seymour Hersh: "Executive Assassination Ring" Answered to Cheney, Had No Congressional Oversight | Rights and Liberties | AlterNet

This is a very interesting read, even for those of you who don't think you need to read links before you comment on them.

As I have said, as time goes by more and more will come out about how corrupt and treasonist the Bush administration was.

If this is true, hopefully we'll see Dickie indicted on charges also. This is quite against the law.

Have we ever had such a corrupt bunch of goons running our country?
Click to expand...

Do you really believe that the fine men and women of the armed forces are going around killing Americans... in America!?!?! I've yet to meet a member of the armed forces who holds America and the Constitution in anything but the highest regard. Do you really think they'd do that? Even the suggestion is insulting.
 
Last edited:
Reverend_Hellh0und said:
This is conspiracy bunk that was dismissed.
Click to expand...
You want to provide a link that proves that Hersh's reporting is wrong? I don't think you've got that. And this is not a conspiracy theory, it is breaking news. Seymour Hersh has rarely been wrong, and he wouldn't go out on a limb with something this weird if he didn't have proof.
 
This guy comes up with a new routine every few months...and every time the Bush hating lefty types idolize him for it.

A fool and his money are soon parted and Seymour Hersh is/has been cashing in on that.
 
WillRockwell said:
You want to provide a link that proves that Hersh's reporting is wrong? I don't think you've got that. And this is not a conspiracy theory, it is breaking news. Seymour Hersh has rarely been wrong, and he wouldn't go out on a limb with something this weird if he didn't have proof.
Click to expand...

:roll:

RightinNYC said:
And remember folks, this is the same Sy Hersh who broke the story that the US was invading Iran and would use nuclear weapons. He's such a good reporter that he managed to break the story twice, once in 2006 and again in 2008.

Damn he's good.
Click to expand...

How about he provide any ACTUAL you know...EVIDENCE...before you demand someone dismissing this as the conspiracy bull**** that it is produce evidence to counter something that isn't backed up by anything truly credible itself.
 
Zyphlin said:
:roll:



How about he provide any ACTUAL you know...EVIDENCE...before you demand someone dismissing this as the conspiracy bull**** that it is produce evidence to counter something that isn't backed up by anything truly credible itself.
Click to expand...

Well, there's no evidence of these allegations actually being true. All I see is hearsay from a guy who skirts the line of credibility, to say the least. As he is the one making the allegations, it's incumbent upon him to provide some sort of evidence. Conspiracy theory tripe...

I just saw some guy down the street get waxed by JSOC. Prove me wrong.

Edit: I think I missed some subtle sarcasm or something. :lol:
 
Last edited:
BulletWounD said:
Well, there's no evidence of these allegations actually being true. All I see is hearsay from a guy who skirts the line of credibility, to say the least. As he is the one making the allegations, it's incumbent upon him to provide some sort of evidence. Conspiracy theory tripe...
Click to expand...

Hersh has not released his investigation yet, only announced that there was one. There will be facts coming, probably more than you can handle.
 
WillRockwell said:
Hersh has not released his investigation yet, only announced that there was one. There will be facts coming, probably more than you can handle.
Click to expand...

Yes, proof Bush really had Anna Nicole Smith killed because she was carrying bin Laden's anti-christ love child.
 
WillRockwell said:
You want to provide a link that proves that Hersh's reporting is wrong? I don't think you've got that. And this is not a conspiracy theory, it is breaking news. Seymour Hersh has rarely been wrong, and he wouldn't go out on a limb with something this weird if he didn't have proof.
Click to expand...

Dude, you have access to google just like I do.

In the April 17, 2006 issue of The New Yorker,[15] Hersh reported on the Bush Administration's purported plans for an air strike within Iran. Of particular note in his article is that an American nuclear first strike (possibly using the B61-11 bunker-buster nuclear weapon) is under consideration to eliminate underground Iranian uranium enrichment facilities. In response, President Bush cited Hersh's reportage as "wild speculation."
Click to expand...

While speaking at a journalism conference recently, Hersh claimed that after the Strait of Hormuz incident, members of the Bush administration met in vice president Dick Cheney's office to consider methods of initiating a war with Iran. One idea considered was staging a false flag operation involving the use of Navy SEALs dressed as Iranian PT boaters who would engage in a firefight with US ships. This idea was shot down. This claim has not been verified
Click to expand...
In August 2006, in an article in The New Yorker, Hersh claimed that the White House gave the green light for Israel to plan and execute an attack on the mounting threat of Hezbollah in Lebanon. Supposedly, communication between the Israeli government and the US administration about this came as early as two months in advance of the capture of two Israeli soldiers and the killing of eight others by Hezbollah prior to the Israel/Lebanon conflict in July 2006.[20] The US administration has denied these claims.
Click to expand...

Hersh's 1997 book about John F. Kennedy, The Dark Side of Camelot, made a number of controversial assertions about the former president, including that he had had a "first marriage" to a woman named Durie Malcolm that was never terminated, and that he had a close working relationship with mob boss Sam Giancana. In a Los Angeles Times review, Edward Jay Epstein cast doubt on these and other assertions, writing, "this book turns out to be, alas, more about the deficiencies of investigative journalism than about the deficiencies of John F. Kennedy."[22] Responding to the book, historian and former Kennedy aide Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. called Hersh "the most gullible investigative reporter I've ever encountered."[23]

A month before the book's publication, newspapers, including USA Today, reported Hersh's announcement that he had removed from the galleys, at the last minute, a segment about legal documents allegedly containing JFK's signature.[24] A paralegal named Lawrence Cusack had shared them with Hersh and encouraged the author to discuss them in the book.[25] Shortly before Hersh's publicized announcement, federal investigators began probing Cusack's sale of the documents at auction.[25] After The Dark Side of Camelot became a bestseller, Cusack was convicted by a federal jury in Manhattan of forging the documents and sentenced to a long prison term.[26] The documents signed by "John F. Kennedy" included a provision, in 1960, for a trust fund to be set up for the institutionalized mother of Marilyn Monroe.[25] In 1997 the Kennedy family denied Cusack's claim that his late father had been an attorney who had represented JFK in 1960.
Click to expand...

Hersh, like most investigative journalists, makes frequent reference to anonymous sources in his reporting; some have criticized this usage, implying that some of these sources are unreliable or even made up. In a review of Hersh's book, Chain of Command, conservative commentator Amir Taheri wrote, "As soon as he has made an assertion he cites a "source" to back it. In every case this is either an un-named former official or an unidentified secret document passed to Hersh in unknown circumstances... By my count Hersh has anonymous 'sources' inside 30 foreign governments and virtually every department of the US government."
Click to expand...

And, perhaps most relevant, given the fact that he said this in a speech...

Those who criticize Hersh's credibility especially point to allegations Hersh has made in public speeches and interviews, rather than in print. In an interview with New York magazine, Hersh made a distinction between the standards of strict factual accuracy for his print reporting and the leeway he allows himself in speeches, in which he may talk informally about stories still being worked on or blur information to protect his sources. "Sometimes I change events, dates, and places in a certain way to protect people... I can’t fudge what I write. But I can certainly fudge what I say."[30]

Some of Hersh's speeches concerning the Iraq War have described violent incidents involving U.S. troops in Iraq. In July 2004, during the height of the Abu Ghraib scandal, he alleged that American troops sexually assaulted young boys:
“ Basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys, children, in cases that have been recorded, the boys were sodomized, with the cameras rolling, and the worst above all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking. That your government has. They’re in total terror it’s going to come out.[30] ”
Click to expand...

In a subsequent interview with New York magazine, Hersh regretted that "I actually didn’t quite say what I wanted to say correctly...it wasn’t that inaccurate, but it was misstated. The next thing I know, it was all over the blogs. And I just realized then, the power of—and so you have to try and be more careful."
Click to expand...

In his book, Chain of Command, he wrote that one of the witness statements he had read described the rape of a boy by a foreign contract interpreter at Abu Ghraib, during which a woman took pictures.[30]

In an interview with KQED host Michael Krasny on October 8, 2004 [32], Hersh reported speaking with a first lieutenant in charge of a unit stationed halfway between Baghdad and the Syrian border:

“ His group was bivouacking outside of town in an agricultural area, and had hired 30 or so Iraqis to guard a local granary. A few weeks passed. They got to know the men they hired, and to like them. Then orders came down from Baghdad that the village would be "cleared." Another platoon from the soldier's company came and executed the Iraqi granary guards. All of them.

He said they just shot them one by one. And his people, and he, and the villagers of course, went nuts," Hersh said quietly. "He was hysterical, totally hysterical. He went to the company captain, who said, 'No, you don't understand, that's a kill. We got 36 insurgents. Don't you read those stories when the Americans say we had a combat maneuver and 15 insurgents were killed?'
Click to expand...

In a speech at McGill University in October 2006, after describing a video he had seen in which U.S. troops, following an attack on their convoy, had fired upon and killed a group of nearby soccer players, Hersh offered the assessment that "there has never been an [American] army as violent and murderous as our army has been in Iraq.” [33] However, in the same speech Hersh later said that there were other armies that had been worse than the Americans and that he did not believe in moral equivalence, when comparing the atrocities of one army to another.
Click to expand...

He's an over the hill dickhead who's desperately trying to remain relevant by coming up with more and more outrageous claims, few to none of which are verifiable.
 
As a side note, I've been told that Dick Cheney argued against President Ford's signing the ban of political assassinations during 1976. What is noticeable with these various bans since 1976 are the exclusion of said ban(s) if the US is at wartime. Even if not at war with a particular country, the order of assassinations appears to still apply and are upheld under US law in other countries regardless the grey areas this may present. I suppose this situation boils down to the legal definition of wartime and to what extent our White House executive offices are legally allowed for exercising such orders with the use of military personnel for making (death squad) hits abroad.

I would be curious to hear what AG Holder and our Supreme Court Justices has to say about this. I highly doubt we'll hear anything from either on the subject.


UNLEASHING THE CIA: msg#00207 culture.discuss.cia-drugs

In 1976, President Ford attempted to curtail the power of the CIA by issuing a presidential order that stated: "No employee of the United States shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, political assassination." Two years later, President Carter strengthened Ford's order with another one which prohibited assassinations by the United States government. And on December 4, 1981 President Reagan issued Executive Order 12333 which was similar to Ford's decree: "No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassinations."

However, Reagan reversed his policy on November 13, 1984. A month before, the CIA had paid hit-men to kill a Muslim sheik named Fadallah. The car bomb exploded, killing 80 people, but Fadallah was not among the dead. At the same time, Reagan was losing support among members of Congress and the American people for the Contra war in Nicaragua. As a result, he canceled his executive order from three years earlier that had banned assassinations. On August 11, 1985 Reagan reinstated the "license to kill" clause after the hijacking of an American TWA plane that summer. However, pressured by members of Congress, Reagan issued a new executive order on May 12, 1986.

Less than a year into President Bush's administration, he issued a "memorandum of law" that allowed "accidental" killing if it was a byproduct of legal action. On October 14, 1989 the Los Angeles Times reported the memo. It read: "A decision by the President to employ overt military force ... Would not constitute assassination if United States forces were employed against combatant forces of another nation, a guerrilla force, or a terrorist or other organization whose actions pose a threat to the security of the United States."
 
I never know how much or what to believe with Hersh, but he's a damn fine storyteller.

He claims he will have evidence for the skeptical for his book. Until then, I don't think there is much to debate.

I do appreciate the link, however.
 
ADK_Forever said:
This is a very interesting read, even for those of you who don't think you need to read links before you comment on them.
Click to expand...

We don't need no stinking links. We know who wants to kill
who and why already. I dare you to tell us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom