Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
295,165
edits
Changes
no edit summary
In 2015, Hersh wrote an article for the ''London Review of Books'' alleging that [[Barack Obama]] had lied about the circumstances surrounding the killing of [[Osama Bin Laden]].<ref>[http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n10/seymour-m-hersh/the-killing-of-osama-bin-laden Seymour M. Hersh "The Killing of Osama bin Laden," ''London Review of Books,'' volume 37, number 10, 21 May 2015]</ref>
In 2015, Hersh wrote an article for the ''London Review of Books'' alleging that [[Barack Obama]] had lied about the circumstances surrounding the killing of [[Osama Bin Laden]].<ref>[http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n10/seymour-m-hersh/the-killing-of-osama-bin-laden Seymour M. Hersh "The Killing of Osama bin Laden," ''London Review of Books,'' volume 37, number 10, 21 May 2015]</ref>
==How the US Took Out the Nord Stream Pipeline==
Hersh werote "I’ve been a freelancer for much of my career. In 1969, I broke the story of a unit of American soldiers in Vietnam who had committed a horrific [[war crime]] They were ordered to attack an ordinary peasant village where, as a few officers knew, they would get no opposition—and told to kill on sight. The boys murdered, raped and mutilated for hours, with no enemy to be found. The crime was covered up at the top of the military chain of command for eighteen months—until I uncovered it.
I won a Pulitzer Prize for international reporting for that work, but getting it before the American public was no easy task. I wasn’t an established journalist working for an established outfit. My first story, published under a barely existent wire service run by a friend of mine, was initially rejected by the editors at ''[[Life]]'' and ''[[Look]]'' magazines. When the''[[Washington Post]]'' finally published it, they littered it with [[Pentagon]] denials and the unthinking skepticism of the rewrite man.
I’ve been told my stories were wrong, invented, outrageous for as long as I can remember—but I’ve never stopped. In 2004, after I published the first stories about the torture of Iraqi prisoners at [[Abu Ghraib]], a Pentagon spokesman responded by calling my journalism “a tapestry of nonsense.” (He also said I was a guy who “threw a lot of crap against the wall” and “expects someone to peel off what’s real.” I won my fifth George Polk Award for that work.)
I’ve put in my time at the major outlets, but was never at home there. More recently, I wouldn’t be welcome anyway. Money, as always, was part of the problem. The Washington Post and my old newspaper, ''[[The New York Times]]'' (to name just a few), have found themselves in a cycle of dwindling home delivery, newsstand sales, and display advertisements. [[CNN]] and its offspring, like [[MSNBC]] and [[Fox News]], battle for sensational headlines over investigative journalism. There are still many brilliant journalists at work, but so much of the reporting has to be within guidelines and constraints that did not exist in the years I was turning out daily stories for the ''Times''.
What you’ll find here is, I hope, a reflection of that freedom. The story you will read today is the truth as I worked for three months to find, with no pressure from a publisher, editors or peers to make it hew to certain lines of thought—or pare it back to assuage their fears. Substack simply means reporting is back . . . unfiltered and unprogrammed—just the way I like it.
==Criticism==
==Criticism==