Yesterday Sy Hersh published a piece in the London Review of Books titled "
The Killing of Osama Bin Laden" which called bullshit on a the official story of the raid disseminated by the White House. Interestingly, the story immediately generated a
complaint by blogger J.R. Hillhouse that she had broken the story in August of 2011 and that Hersh should at least have acknowledged that fact in his story. There was also
a story in August 2011 on former intelligence officer Pat Lang's blog which posited the same basic series of events.
Hersh also published another piece last August in the London Review with the title "
The Red Line and the Rat Line" about the purported Sarin gas attacks by the Syrian Government which were used by Obama in an attempt to bring us into an active role in the Syrian Civil War.
My questions are why the blog reports did not seem to be followed up at the time by any other media (I know the blogosphere has been poorly regarded by MSM) and more generally why no USA media published either of Hersh's articles? Is Hersh no longer viewed as a credible reporter despite (or because of) his history? Is the US media unwilling to publish material that would cast doubt on government foreign policy assertions especially regarding terrorism or national security? I don't know whether the story presented is true or false, although I will say that I have read a wide range of non-USA reporting over the years that views the US story with skepticism, but why not run the story? It would certainly raise circulation and page views for some publication or other.