On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:47:34 -0600, Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Martin Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:35:17 -0500, Damon Agretto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Is there a second source confirming this? I've always had some doubts > about > > > the Guardian... > > > > The Guardian is reporting a story in the New Yorker. > > One interesting comment on Seymore Hearsh...he is an investigative reporter > who finds 300% of breaking stories. Sometimes, he is dead on. Other > times, his willingness to go with a story that has not been properly cross > confirmed. An example of the latter was a story, early in Afghanistan war, > about a massive, failed, fatal US effort. I remember seeing him on TV > describing it. Since it's hard to believe that the death of a number of > American servicemen could be hidden for 3 years, this provides an example > of him trusting a source that he shouldn't. > > So, a Seymore Hearsh article should be a heads up that something _may_ be > happening, but not confirmation that something _is_ happening.
Hersh has great contacts in the CIA, State Dept., and the DoD. If he reported there was a number of American deaths in an Afghan operation count on it. The big story is that we are already engaging in military operations in Iran with troops on the ground. What would Bush's reaction be if in addition to satellites and spy plan overflights and intensive spy operations some foreign military power was inserting special forces in the US preparing for military strikes? Gary Denton _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
