Raid on Bin Laden was BS

[CommuterBob]

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n10/seymour-m-hersh/the-killing-of-osama-bin-laden
"This spring I contacted Durrani and told him in detail what I had learned about the bin Laden assault from American sources: that bin Laden had been a prisoner of the ISI at the Abbottabad compound since 2006; that Kayani and Pasha knew of the raid in advance and had made sure that the two helicopters delivering the Seals to Abbottabad could cross Pakistani airspace without triggering any alarms; that the CIA did not learn of bin Laden’s whereabouts by tracking his couriers, as the White House has claimed since May 2011, but from a former senior Pakistani intelligence officer who betrayed the secret in return for much of the $25 million reward offered by the US, and that, while Obama did order the raid and the Seal team did carry it out, many other aspects of the administration’s account were false."

"Bank was also told by the walk-in that bin Laden was very ill, and that early on in his confinement at Abbottabad, the ISI had ordered Amir Aziz, a doctor and a major in the Pakistani army, to move nearby to provide treatment. ‘The truth is that bin Laden was an invalid, but we cannot say that,’ the retired official said. ‘“You mean you guys shot a cripple? Who was about to grab his AK-47?”’
‘It didn’t take long to get the co-operation we needed, because the Pakistanis wanted to ensure the continued release of American military aid, a good percentage of which was anti-terrorism funding that finances personal security, such as bullet-proof limousines and security guards and housing for the ISI leadership,’ the retired official said. He added that there were also under-the-table personal ‘incentives’ that were financed by off-the-books Pentagon contingency funds.

A worrying factor at this early point, according to the retired official, was Saudi Arabia, which had been financing bin Laden’s upkeep since his seizure by the Pakistanis. ‘The Saudis didn’t want bin Laden’s presence revealed to us because he was a Saudi, and so they told the Pakistanis to keep him out of the picture. The Saudis feared if we knew we would pressure the Pakistanis to let bin Laden start talking to us about what the Saudis had been doing with al-Qaida. And they were dropping money – lots of it. The Pakistanis, in turn, were concerned that the Saudis might spill the beans about their control of bin Laden. The fear was that if the US found out about bin Laden from Riyadh, all hell would break out."

Damning and eye-opening.

 

[UCFKnight85]

lol and also straight out of a conspiracy theorist's wet dream.

First, the ISI is full of terrorists themselves and is probably the least trust worthy intelligence agency on earth. It's not really a secret that many within their ranks support the Taliban and Al Qaeda. It's no surprise then that the Pakistanis would claim that they in fact had bin Laden as a prisoner, instead of admitting that he was living next to their military academy and our forces got into their air space undetected.

Secondly, the Saudis kicked bin Laden out of KSA and his family. Why then would they give a shit about helping to harbor him secretly in Pakistan at the risk of being caught and alienating every single Western ally that they desperately need to counter Iran? They revoked his citizenship well before 9/11.

 

[CommuterBob]

The details of the raid:

"At the Abbottabad compound ISI guards were posted around the clock to keep watch over bin Laden and his wives and children. They were under orders to leave as soon as they heard the rotors of the US helicopters. The town was dark: the electricity supply had been cut off on the orders of the ISI hours before the raid began. One of the Black Hawks crashed inside the walls of the compound, injuring many on board. ‘The guys knew the TOT [time on target] had to be tight because they would wake up the whole town going in,’ the retired official said. The cockpit of the crashed Black Hawk, with its communication and navigational gear, had to be destroyed by concussion grenades, and this would create a series of explosions and a fire visible for miles. Two Chinook helicopters had flown from Afghanistan to a nearby Pakistani intelligence base to provide logistical support, and one of them was immediately dispatched to Abbottabad. But because the helicopter had been equipped with a bladder loaded with extra fuel for the two Black Hawks, it first had to be reconfigured as a troop carrier. The crash of the Black Hawk and the need to fly in a replacement were nerve-wracking and time-consuming setbacks, but the Seals continued with their mission. There was no firefight as they moved into the compound; the ISI guards had gone. ‘Everyone in Pakistan has a gun and high-profile, wealthy folks like those who live in Abbottabad have armed bodyguards, and yet there were no weapons in the compound,’ the retired official pointed out. Had there been any opposition, the team would have been highly vulnerable. Instead, the retired official said, an ISI liaison officer flying with the Seals guided them into the darkened house and up a staircase to bin Laden’s quarters. The Seals had been warned by the Pakistanis that heavy steel doors blocked the stairwell on the first and second-floor landings; bin Laden’s rooms were on the third floor. The Seal squad used explosives to blow the doors open, without injuring anyone. One of bin Laden’s wives was screaming hysterically and a bullet – perhaps a stray round – struck her knee. Aside from those that hit bin Laden, no other shots were fired. (The Obama administration’s account would hold otherwise.)

‘They knew where the target was – third floor, second door on the right,’ the retired official said. ‘Go straight there. Osama was cowering and retreated into the bedroom. Two shooters followed him and opened up. Very simple, very straightforward, very professional hit.’ Some of the Seals were appalled later at the White House’s initial insistence that they had shot bin Laden in self-defence, the retired official said. ‘Six of the Seals’ finest, most experienced NCOs, faced with an unarmed elderly civilian, had to kill him in self-defence? The house was shabby and bin Laden was living in a cell with bars on the window and barbed wire on the roof. The rules of engagement were that if bin Laden put up any opposition they were authorised to take lethal action. But if they suspected he might have some means of opposition, like an explosive vest under his robe, they could also kill him. So here’s this guy in a mystery robe and they shot him. It’s not because he was reaching for a weapon. The rules gave them absolute authority to kill the guy.’ The later White House claim that only one or two bullets were fired into his head was ‘bullshit’, the retired official said. ‘The squad came through the door and obliterated him. As the Seals say, “We kicked his ass and took his gas.”’
After they killed bin Laden, ‘the Seals were just there, some with physical injuries from the crash, waiting for the relief chopper,’ the retired official said. ‘Twenty tense minutes. The Black Hawk is still burning. There are no city lights. No electricity. No police. No fire trucks. They have no prisoners.’ Bin Laden’s wives and children were left for the ISI to interrogate and relocate. ‘Despite all the talk,’ the retired official continued, there were ‘no garbage bags full of computers and storage devices. The guys just stuffed some books and papers they found in his room in their backpacks. The Seals weren’t there because they thought bin Laden was running a command centre for al-Qaida operations, as the White House would later tell the media. And they were not intelligence experts gathering information inside that house.’
On a normal assault mission, the retired official said, there would be no waiting around if a chopper went down. ‘The Seals would have finished the mission, thrown off their guns and gear, and jammed into the remaining Black Hawk and di-di-maued’ – Vietnamese slang for leaving in a rush – ‘out of there, with guys hanging out of the doors. They would not have blown the chopper – no commo gear is worth a dozen lives – unless they knew they were safe. Instead they stood around outside the compound, waiting for the bus to arrive.’ Pasha and Kayani had delivered on all their promises."

 

[CommuterBob]

lol and also straight out of a conspiracy theorist's wet dream.

First, the ISI is full of terrorists themselves and is probably the least trust worthy intelligence agency on earth. It's not really a secret that many within their ranks support the Taliban and Al Qaeda. It's no surprise then that the Pakistanis would claim that they in fact had bin Laden as a prisoner, instead of admitting that he was living next to their military academy and our forces got into their air space undetected.

Secondly, the Saudis kicked bin Laden out of KSA and his family. Why then would they give a shit about helping to harbor him secretly in Pakistan at the risk of being caught and alienating every single Western ally that they desperately need to counter Iran? They revoked his citizenship well before 9/11.

The source on this are Americans.

 

[1ofTheseKnights]

What is being said on TV is reality always

 

[Dmarino110]

man its almost like 85 has an agenda...

 

[CommuterBob]

And what really happened to Bin Laden's body:
"In his address announcing the raid, Obama said that after killing bin Laden the Seals ‘took custody of his body’. The statement created a problem. In the initial plan it was to be announced a week or so after the fact that bin Laden was killed in a drone strike somewhere in the mountains on the Pakistan/Afghanistan border and that his remains had been identified by DNA testing. But with Obama’s announcement of his killing by the Seals everyone now expected a body to be produced. Instead, reporters were told that bin Laden’s body had been flown by the Seals to an American military airfield in Jalalabad, Afghanistan, and then straight to the USS Carl Vinson, a supercarrier on routine patrol in the North Arabian Sea. Bin Laden had then been buried at sea, just hours after his death."

"The Pentagon report, which was put online in June 2013, noted that Admiral McRaven had ordered the files on the raid to be deleted from all military computers and moved to the CIA, where they would be shielded from FOIA requests by the agency’s ‘operational exemption’.
McRaven’s action meant that outsiders could not get access to the Carl Vinson’s unclassified logs. Logs are sacrosanct in the navy, and separate ones are kept for air operations, the deck, the engineering department, the medical office, and for command information and control. They show the sequence of events day by day aboard the ship; if there has been a burial at sea aboard the Carl Vinson, it would have been recorded.
There wasn’t any gossip about a burial among the Carl Vinson’s sailors. The carrier concluded its six-month deployment in June 2011. When the ship docked at its home base in Coronado, California, Rear Admiral Samuel Perez, commander of the Carl Vinson carrier strike group, told reporters that the crew had been ordered not to talk about the burial. Captain Bruce Lindsey, skipper of the Carl Vinson, told reporters he was unable to discuss it. Cameron Short, one of the crew of the Carl Vinson, told the Commercial-News of Danville, Illinois, that the crew had not been told anything about the burial. ‘All he knows is what he’s seen on the news,’ the newspaper reported."

"The retired official said there had been another complication: some members of the Seal team had bragged to colleagues and others that they had torn bin Laden’s body to pieces with rifle fire. The remains, including his head, which had only a few bullet holes in it, were thrown into a body bag and, during the helicopter flight back to Jalalabad, some body parts were tossed out over the Hindu Kush mountains – or so the Seals claimed. At the time, the retired official said, the Seals did not think their mission would be made public by Obama within a few hours: ‘If the president had gone ahead with the cover story, there would have been no need to have a funeral within hours of the killing. Once the cover story was blown, and the death was made public, the White House had a serious “Where’s the body?” problem. The world knew US forces had killed bin Laden in Abbottabad. Panic city. What to do? We need a “functional body” because we have to be able to say we identified bin Laden via a DNA analysis. It would be navy officers who came up with the “burial at sea” idea. Perfect. No body. Honourable burial following sharia law. Burial is made public in great detail, but Freedom of Information documents confirming the burial are denied for reasons of “national security”.

 

[Bob the Citronaut]

Just another phony scandal. Move on you racists. If Obama were white this wouldn't have even been a blip.

 

[Game_Day_Sports]

No doubt, the account we have heard isn't 100% accurate. I am sure the order was, nobody of value is brought out alive. I am also sure that they blew the chopper because it was something with some unique advances they didn't want it to get into anybody else's hands. I am also sure that Pakistan doesn't want people to think that the Americans can fly in and out at will either. However, by all accounts they did recover a bunch of intel there that they have used in other take downs. It doesn't take an intel team to know to grab computers and notebooks.

So as usual, it is somewhere in that grey area in the middle so the conspiracy nuts can say that Bush ordered the attack on the towers in 2001 and a secret weather device caused Katrina.

 

[CommuterBob]

No doubt, the account we have heard isn't 100% accurate. I am sure the order was, nobody of value is brought out alive. I am also sure that they blew the chopper because it was something with some unique advances they didn't want it to get into anybody else's hands. I am also sure that Pakistan doesn't want people to think that the Americans can fly in and out at will either. However, by all accounts they did recover a bunch of intel there that they have used in other take downs. It doesn't take an intel team to know to grab computers and notebooks.

So as usual, it is somewhere in that grey area in the middle so the conspiracy nuts can say that Bush ordered the attack on the towers in 2001 and a secret weather device caused Katrina.

What other take downs, though? The "recovery of intel" is also part of the cover-up, according to the article. I always found the whole burial at sea story to be bogus and out of place. It wouldn't shock me much that this was at least 80% true.

 

[UCFKnight85]

So basically, this writer is perplexed as to why they can't get Top Secret level intelligence that is less than 10 years old via an FOIA request.

LOL

There it is- the conspiracy is broken! FOIA requests are denied, and Rear Admirals have no comment!

 

[Poolside Knight]

No way we trusted the ISI on a HVT like Bin Laden. I could believe it on some B level terrorists but not the head of the snake

 

[CommuterBob]

Of course the White House and the CIA are denying this:

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/white-house-calls-seymour-hersh-story-about-osama-118704190246.html
But they're not really saying anything other than "nuh-uh."

“There are too many inaccuracies and baseless assertions in this piece to fact-check each one,” White House National Security spokesman Ned Price said in a statement."

"It’s all wrong. I started reading the article last night. I got a third of the way through and I stopped, because every sentence I was reading was wrong,” Morrell said on “CBS This Morning.” “The source that Hersh talked to has no idea what he’s talking about."

 

[CommuterBob]

So basically, this writer is perplexed as to why they can't get Top Secret level intelligence that is less than 10 years old via an FOIA request.

LOL

There it is- the conspiracy is broken! FOIA requests are denied, and Rear Admirals have no comment!

No. You're reading something that isn't there. He mentions that the ship's logs for the Vinson were ordered to be destroyed and moved under CIA protection, therefore forever avoiding FOIA request.

 

[CommuterBob]

Vox.com with a great takedown of this story and its author. Basically calls Hersh crazy, despite being a well-respected journalist for decades, saying he's lost it.

http://www.vox.com/2015/5/11/8584473/seymour-hersh-osama-bin-laden
"Hersh's entire narrative turns on a secret deal, in which the US promised Pakistan increased military aid and a "freer hand in Afghanistan." In fact, the exact opposite of this occurred, with US military aid dropping and US-Pakistan cooperation in Afghanistan plummeting as both sides feuded bitterly for years after the raid.
Hersh explains this seemingly fatal contradiction by suggesting the deal fell apart due to miscommunication between the Americans and Pakistanis. But it's strange to argue that the dozens of officials on both sides would be competent enough to secretly plan and execute a massive international ruse, and then to uphold their conspiracy for years after the fact, but would not be competent enough to get on the same page about aid delivery."

"There are smaller but still troubling inconsistencies. Why, for example, would the US need to construct a massive double of the Abbottabad compound for special forces to train in, if the real compound were going to be totally unguarded and there would be no firefight?
See also, for example, the intelligence material that the US brought back from bin Laden's compound and then displayed to the world. Hersh says that, in fact, bin Laden had spent the previous five years a hostage of Pakistani intelligence rather than an active member of al-Qaeda. The intelligence "treasure trove" was thus a fabrication, cooked up by the CIA after the raid to back up the American-Pakistani conspiracy.
This is a strange thing to argue, as Carnegie Endowment Syria research Aron Lund points out, because al-Qaeda second-in-command Ayman al-Zawahiri subsequently said the intelligence materials were real, and had quoted from them himself. So either Hersh is wrong or, Lund writes, "Zawahiri is helping Obama forge evidence to boost US-Pakistan relations, which seems like an unusual hobby for an [al-Qaeda] leader."

 

[UCFWayne]

What other take downs, though? The "recovery of intel" is also part of the cover-up, according to the article. I always found the whole burial at sea story to be bogus and out of place. It wouldn't shock me much that this was at least 80% true.

I never really believed the whole burial at sea story either. I think that part is complete BS. The rest is probably true though.

 

[UCFKnight85]

No. You're reading something that isn't there. He mentions that the ship's logs for the Vinson were ordered to be destroyed and moved under CIA protection, therefore forever avoiding FOIA request.

So you can't understand why a ship's logs were sealed as Top Secret when that ship was an integral part of one of the biggest covert special operations missions in US history?

You're looking for conspiracy clues that don't exist. This is normal procedure. Hell, we're just now declassifying documents on operations that took place during Vietnam.

 

[CommuterBob]

So you can't understand why a ship's logs were sealed as Top Secret when that ship was an integral part of one of the biggest covert special operations missions in US history?

You're looking for conspiracy clues that don't exist. This is normal procedure. Hell, we're just now declassifying documents on operations that took place during Vietnam.

Sure it is. And for the record, I am not making this accusation, but the author of the article linked in the OP. It's plausible. It's probably not all true, but then again I'm sure the official story isn't all true either. It's somewhere in the middle, I'm sure.

 

[UCF w00t]

I too think the truth is somewhere in the middle (probably more on Hersh's side though). I've never fully believed the official story, namely the burial at sea part. He probably had 50 bullet holes in him. I mean if you were the 5th Seal up the stairs wouldn't you want to pump a couple rounds in too (this aspect has been reported in the past)? That wouldn't look very good in the press later in pictures. I'm sure the Seals did gather evidence. It doesn't take a genius to grab hard drives from a computer. Pretty easy to bust open with little or no tools and take them out without damaging them. I doubt Bin Laden was truly a prisoner there but probably was allowed to be living there under their watch. He probably had some operational control of Al Qaeda but not much. Al Qaeda had pretty much been decimated already (and in the process of reforming as Isis and friends). He probably did have people running proverbial letters for him. The way it's portrayed in Zero Dark Thirty is a fun story but frankly is more far fetched than a guy showing up and telling the Americans "I know where Bin Laden is, show me the money".

The report says they were basically caught with their pants down by one of their own who ratted them out for the cash. The senior Pakis (whom are corrupt) then had to choice but to work with us. Wouldn't be surprised if they let us in for the raid and helped out either. We basically had them by the balls once we knew he was there.

I'm actually surprised that 85 is taking this stance. I mean the article really makes Obama and his team look like shitbag politicians using the raid for political gain and sending the military and intelligence guys up the river. Isn't that perfect for 85's rhetoric? I guess he's more inline with just following the official story even though the unofficial story seems more plausible.

While this takedown of Vox's takedown seems like it has an axe to grind, it makes some very good points. Vox is a bunch of asshats who couldn't tell journalism from their own dicks. If Vox takes a stance against something, I'm almost obligated to take the opposite stance. As I would think 85 would since they're a bunch of commie pinko libtards.

 

[sk8knight]

Bob put on his tin foil hat and smoked the good stuff for that one. You can believe what you want but there are a hundred reasons why that account is flawed.

 

[UCFKnight85]

I too think the truth is somewhere in the middle (probably more on Hersh's side though). I've never fully believed the official story, namely the burial at sea part. He probably had 50 bullet holes in him. I mean if you were the 5th Seal up the stairs wouldn't you want to pump a couple rounds in too (this aspect has been reported in the past)? That wouldn't look very good in the press later in pictures. I'm sure the Seals did gather evidence. It doesn't take a genius to grab hard drives from a computer. Pretty easy to bust open with little or no tools and take them out without damaging them. I doubt Bin Laden was truly a prisoner there but probably was allowed to be living there under their watch. He probably had some operational control of Al Qaeda but not much. Al Qaeda had pretty much been decimated already (and in the process of reforming as Isis and friends). He probably did have people running proverbial letters for him. The way it's portrayed in Zero Dark Thirty is a fun story but frankly is more far fetched than a guy showing up and telling the Americans "I know where Bin Laden is, show me the money".

The report says they were basically caught with their pants down by one of their own who ratted them out for the cash. The senior Pakis (whom are corrupt) then had to choice but to work with us. Wouldn't be surprised if they let us in for the raid and helped out either. We basically had them by the balls once we knew he was there.

I'm actually surprised that 85 is taking this stance. I mean the article really makes Obama and his team look like shitbag politicians using the raid for political gain and sending the military and intelligence guys up the river. Isn't that perfect for 85's rhetoric? I guess he's more inline with just following the official story even though the unofficial story seems more plausible.

While this takedown of Vox's takedown seems like it has an axe to grind, it makes some very good points. Vox is a bunch of asshats who couldn't tell journalism from their own dicks. If Vox takes a stance against something, I'm almost obligated to take the opposite stance. As I would think 85 would since they're a bunch of commie pinko libtards.

I took that stance because it makes a lot more sense than believing that most everything about the intelligence gathering/raid/and "cover up" was false. Of course I am sure that SOME stuff was redacted or "altered" when it was presented to the public. That's par for the course on any covert or JASOC operation.

Here's the problem with this story: the $$$$ bounty was active on OBL's head since 2001. If the Pakistanis had OBL since 2006, why then would it take years for someone to consider calling the US Embassy and collecting? Their forces are corrupt to the bone and they're all relatively poor people living in shit.

The Saudi piece makes no sense either. The Saudis hated bin Lande, revoked his citizenship years before 2011, and possibly were trying to kill him themselves since his Al Qaeda operation was heavily influence and funded by Iran. Not only do I not believe the Pakistanis would harbor OBL on their behalf, I don't believe they'd pay huge sums of money to keep him safe simply because he was a Saudi.

 

[HuffyCane]

The author has a long history of publishing things embarrassing to the US military and diplomatic communities. Sometimes he is right. Sometimes he is wrong. Lately, he's been more wrong than right ...