Um that's a bit of an extremely polarising conclusion to take away from elemenopy's comment.

"Questionable at best" tries to imply something entirely different than what was being said, which is that Hersh's claims were bold, not entirely backed up and subject to criticism. "Questionable in part", al right, but extending that to "questionable at best" sounds like you're pushing your own agenda here.

Maybe you just worded yourself too strongly, but if you decide to stick with that, please explain to everyone how the claims about what the US did to the vaccination programs in order to get to Bin Laden, made in Hersh's article, are either "questionable" or "worse".

Because as far as I've been able to check, Hersh's claims about the actions regarding vaccination programs part of the story (which is just a small part--but the part we are discussing here) are not being criticized by anyone in particular, except by those painting with the very broad brush that the entire story is questionable. Like you are doing.