I read on Twitter that Hersh says that he never relies on a single source, and that he always corroborates it with other stuff. So that's the main complaint of people who try to criticize the article - even though they are fine with single-source articles making claims about Russiagate and stuff like that.
The most valid criticisms (not in this podcast) have been about Jens Stolenberg, of whom Hersh alleged that he had been a US loyalist since the Vietnam War. But he was only a teenager at the time, and I read claims that he had actually been opposed to the Vietnam War. That has little to do with the point of the article, and is probably the result of insufficient fact-checking (the classic kind) and editing, combined with the impressive memory of an 85-year-old man.
And it's not as though leftists and propagandists haven't regularly thrown out iffy claims based solely on anonymous sources (or, like that one UN document about "online harassment of women", which cited documents off the local harddrive as viable sources).
I would honestly fear for Hersh himself, if he wasn't very old and if it wouldn't just prove things right. Maybe they will suicide him in a few years, just to send a message.
He should have lead with 'sources familiar with [whoevers] thinking'. As far as i know that's the most reliable way to get the NPCs to believe anything.
Biden: If Russia invades... there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2.
Swedish investigation: Yep, it was sabottage.
Blinken: This is a tremendous opportunity! We are the leading supplier of natural gas to Europe!
MSM: Russia!
I read on Twitter that Hersh says that he never relies on a single source, and that he always corroborates it with other stuff. So that's the main complaint of people who try to criticize the article - even though they are fine with single-source articles making claims about Russiagate and stuff like that.
The most valid criticisms (not in this podcast) have been about Jens Stolenberg, of whom Hersh alleged that he had been a US loyalist since the Vietnam War. But he was only a teenager at the time, and I read claims that he had actually been opposed to the Vietnam War. That has little to do with the point of the article, and is probably the result of insufficient fact-checking (the classic kind) and editing, combined with the impressive memory of an 85-year-old man.
The only argument I've heard against the story is 'The sources are anonymous!'
No shit they're anonymous. If those people are outed they're either going to prison or into the ground.
And it's not as though leftists and propagandists haven't regularly thrown out iffy claims based solely on anonymous sources (or, like that one UN document about "online harassment of women", which cited documents off the local harddrive as viable sources).
I would honestly fear for Hersh himself, if he wasn't very old and if it wouldn't just prove things right. Maybe they will suicide him in a few years, just to send a message.
He should have lead with 'sources familiar with [whoevers] thinking'. As far as i know that's the most reliable way to get the NPCs to believe anything.