He has the code name of the operation and a ton of alleged operational details, attributed to his sources in the Intel community.
Re:
by The_Colonel on Wednesday February 08, 2023 @02:57PM
(#34713964)
I, too, can make up a code name and operational details. Still no evidence.
The code name was "Gouda", it was established that it was the Swiss Vatican guard. Ementaler would have been too much into the face and the Vatican wanted to avoid problems with the Italians, so Parmesan was of the table.
The name "Wallace" kept coming up, supposedly connected to MI6.
And the support operation was called "Gromit"?
Re:
by PonySoldier on Wednesday February 08, 2023 @03:09PM
(#34714163)
As someone else noted in another thread, Hersh's reputation and the source are absolutely evidence. What he hasn't provided is hard proof for the claims.
I can't find any proof whatsoever as to who actually did it from the western authorities claiming to investigate it either though. In fact, there's been little to no news or updates at all since the incident.
Re:
by The_Colonel on Wednesday February 08, 2023 @03:44PM
(#34714779)
> Hersh's reputation
Not an evidence.
> the source
Remains anonymous. Also, not an evidence.
Re:
by JumpCrisscross on Wednesday February 08, 2023 @03:52PM
(#34714907)
> Hersh's reputation and the source are absolutely evidence
It’s a signal to pay attention to the issue. To keep an eye out for evidence. It’s not evidence per se.
Both were corroborated with evidence. I'm scanning this post for new evidence and coming up empty. The fact that American action was technically plausible has always been known.
One might twist Hersh claiming he has an anonymous source as new information. But that's the closest we get. On its own, that's not sufficient to advance the discussion in a meaningful way because it presents no new facts.