Author Topic: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid  (Read 7659 times)

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #25 on: May 01, 2012, 07:59:05 AM »
Obama is not my president.  He is a malevolent wannabe Mugabe Chavez Papa Doc dictator.   

He makes me sick to my stomach as do his drones and cult followers.


lol.. shut up chump.. you sound like a little bitch

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #26 on: May 01, 2012, 08:01:58 AM »

lol.. shut up chump.. you sound like a little bitch

 ::) 

hope and change 

whork

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6587
  • Getbig!
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #27 on: May 01, 2012, 08:02:58 AM »
Wow. The left is so pathetic. Do they have no shame? Obama at this point has become a joke.

You should watch a football match instead and leave politics to grown people

What you really want is a team to cheer, to make your life meaningful. Go watch a football game

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #28 on: May 01, 2012, 08:20:28 AM »
Navy SEALs Are Hammering Obama For Taking Credit For Their Work
Brett LoGiurato|May 1, 2012, 9:20 AM|4,095|46


US Navy
 
It's been a year to the day since President Obama announced the heroic mission of the Navy SEAL Team Six that killed Osama bin Laden. But Navy SEALs aren't taking too kindly to Obama reminding everyone about it in the past few days.
 
Surprise, surprise: Today is all about politics.
 
Current serving and ex-Navy SEALs spoke with The Daily Mail for a story published last night, and boy did they have a lot to say. A sampling: Some said the mission was a no-brainer for any president. Some accused Obama of taking credit for their work. Some said it was an attempt to use them as "ammunition" for his re-election campaign.
 
Here's Ryan Zinke, a former 23-year SEAL that is now a Republican state Senator from Montana:

"The decision was a no brainer. I applaud him for making it but I would not overly pat myself on the back for making the right call. I think every president would have done the same. He is justified in saying it was his decision but the preparation, the sacrifice — it was a broader team effort."
 
For someone not currently engulfed in politics on the other side, let's go to Clint Bruce, who "gave up the chance of an NFL career to serve as a SEAL officer," according to the Mail:
 
"We were extremely surprised and discouraged by the publicity because it compromises the ability of those guys to operate. It’s a waste of time to speculate about who would and wouldn’t have made that decision. It was a symphony of opportunity and intelligence that allowed this administration to give the green light. We want to acknowledge that they made that decision.
 
"Politicians should let the public know where they stand on national security but not in the play-by-play, detailed way that has been done recently. The intricacies of national security should not become part of stump speeches."
 
The debate continues to rage over Obama's campaign ad, in which Bill Clinton voices over the narrative that Obama made the tough decision that led to the death of the mastermind behind the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11.
 
Here is the mistake Obama made, though, which makes it so controversial and ripe for attack: The speculation over whether Mitt Romney would have made the same call.
 
It's a delicate balance: On one hand, Romney is on record saying that it was not “worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.” On the other, how much credit does a politician — even a President — get for the operation?
 
Romney, for his part, said yesterday that "any thinking American" would have ordered the killing. Today, he issued a statement:
 
“Today marks the one year anniversary of the mission that brought Osama bin Laden to justice. That mission was the culmination of nearly a decade of hard work and sacrifice by our men and women in the military and intelligence communities. I commend all those who planned and conducted the bin Laden raid, and I applaud President Obama for giving the go ahead for the mission.
 
Expect this political back-and-forth to continue as part of the foreign policy debate up through the final days leading up to the election.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/navy-seals-hammer-obama-on-osama-bin-laden-ad-2012-5#ixzz1tdDZ5xSj


Necrosis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 9899
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #29 on: May 01, 2012, 08:42:07 AM »

It was one former Navy SEAL commander.  He doesn't speak for every Navy SEAL..... ::)


In any event, I don't think the ad will make much of a difference.  People are more focused on jobs, the housing market gas prices, and their finances rather than Bin Laden.

nah this is the absolute truth, it goes against obama so the right will harp on it and will run with it. Whats that a negroid is killed? the liberal media and leftists morons will run with that. The only sane people here are the ones who can critically think about each decision without the words liberal or conservative floating around in there heads.

the US is like nazi germany, no seriously, the propaganda that is going on is laughable. Both sides are just lying and fucking with you and this is what people are concerned with.

dario73

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6467
  • Getbig!
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #30 on: May 01, 2012, 08:43:51 AM »
To be president is like being a coach for a football team. The shit that happens on your watch (win/lose) is on your head.

Its the same thing with the economy. Im not saying its fair but its how it is.

Where did i say it took great guts?

That still doesn't give him the right to politicize it. NONE. He is acting as if it was the hardest thing in the world. Especially, when he could fall back and blame any of the military leaders.

You didn't say it took guts. I just made that statement just in case you tried to present it as an argument.

Shockwave

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20807
  • Decepticons! Scramble!
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #31 on: May 01, 2012, 08:46:55 AM »
nah this is the absolute truth, it goes against obama so the right will harp on it and will run with it. Whats that a negroid is killed? the liberal media and leftists morons will run with that. The only sane people here are the ones who can critically think about each decision without the words liberal or conservative floating around in there heads.

the US is like nazi germany, no seriously, the propaganda that is going on is laughable. Both sides are just lying and fucking with you and this is what people are concerned with.
Ironically, I agree with most of this.

Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #32 on: May 01, 2012, 09:01:01 AM »
You should watch a football match instead and leave politics to grown people

What you really want is a team to cheer, to make your life meaningful. Go watch a football game

Coming from blacken, this quote is incredibly ironic. You're autistic and a parasitic benefit leech. Go bag groceries or something. 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #33 on: May 01, 2012, 12:42:43 PM »
Obama's taking credit for "giving the order'...I ordered some lasagna yesterday, does that make me Chef Boyardee?

lol

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #34 on: May 01, 2012, 12:44:05 PM »
"You know the thing about heroes? They don't brag."  Sen. John McCain. 

Well said. 

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #35 on: May 01, 2012, 12:58:36 PM »
I also remember mccain saying:

KING: If you were president and knew that bin Laden was in Pakistan, you know where, would you have U.S. forces go in after him?

MCCAIN: Larry, I'm not going to go there and here's why, because Pakistan is a sovereign nation. I think the Pakistanis would want bin Laden out of their hair and out of their country and it's causing great difficulties in Pakistan itself.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #36 on: May 01, 2012, 01:03:48 PM »
Bush passed on the decision.  "I'm the decider" must have taken the week off.



2005 - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld who cancelled the U.S. special forces operation designed to "snatch and grab" Ayman Al Zawahiri and other senior Al Qaeda leaders. The story, following July 2006 revelations that the CIA had previously disbanded its Bin Laden unit, gives lie to one of the central tenets of the so-called Bush Doctrine: no safe havens for terrorists. As the New York Times reported in July 2007, Rumsfeld ran roughshod over then CIA Director Porter Goss, scuttling the mission at the last moment even as the U.S. forces were boarding planes for the assault:

 
But the mission was called off after Donald H. Rumsfeld, then the defense secretary, rejected an 11th-hour appeal by Porter J. Goss, then the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, officials said. Members of a Navy Seals unit in parachute gear had already boarded C-130 cargo planes in Afghanistan when the mission was canceled, said a former senior intelligence official involved in the planning.
 

Mr. Rumsfeld decided that the operation, which had ballooned from a small number of military personnel and C.I.A. operatives to several hundred, was cumbersome and put too many American lives at risk, the current and former officials said. He was also concerned that it could cause a rift with Pakistan, an often reluctant ally that has barred the American military from operating in its tribal areas, the officials said.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #37 on: May 01, 2012, 01:13:01 PM »
Obama lands in Afghanistan in surprise visit

President Obama to make a televised address from Afghanistan

Author: By the CNN Wire Staff


Published On: May 01 2012 03:03:21 PM EDT Updated On: May 01 2012 04:00:46 PM EDT

Kevin Lamarque / Reuters


President Barack Obama shakes hands with U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Ryan Crocker upon his arrival at Bagram Air Base in Kabul, Afghanistan.
 KABUL, Afghanistan (CNN) -
President Barack Obama made an unannounced visit to Afghanistan on Tuesday, the first anniversary of the U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden in neighboring Pakistan.

On his third trip to Afghanistan since taking office, Obama met with President Hamid Karzai and will make a televised address at 7:30 p.m. ET.

Tuesday's visit comes at a particularly delicate time in relations between the United States and Afghanistan, as plans to withdraw U.S.-led international forces proceed.

The countries have been negotiating a strategic agreement that would outline the basis for U.S.-Afghan cooperation after most U.S. and allied troops withdraw in 2014. Obama and Karzai are expected to sign the agreement on Tuesday, according to the senior administration officials who briefed reporters on the flight.

The Strategic Partnership Agreement provides a framework for the U.S.-Afghanistan partnership for the decade following the U.S. and allied troop withdrawal, the officials said on condition of not being identified.

Specific levels of U.S. forces and funding are not set in the agreement and will be determined by the United States in consulation with alllies, the officials said.

Noting the anniversary of the bin Laden mission, the officials called it a resonant day for the Afghan and American people.

More than 130,000 troops from 50 countries serve in Afghanistan, according to the NATO-led International Security and Assistance Force. The United States is the biggest contributor, providing around 90,000 troops, followed by the United Kingdom (9,500), Germany (4,800) and France (3,600).

The war that began in 2001 is increasingly unpopular in the United States, with the latest CNN/ORC International poll in late March showing 25% of respondents supporting it while 72% opposed it.

More than 2,700 troops from the United States and its partners have died in the war, the majority of them American.

In 2011, the United States outlined its plan to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2014. The move was followed by withdrawal announcements by most of the NATO nations.

Last week, Afghan National Security Adviser Rangin Daftar Spanta and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker initialed a text that outlined the kind of relationship the two countries want in the decade following the NATO withdrawal.

The deal had been long expected after Washington and Kabul found compromises over the thorny issues of "night raids" by U.S. forces on Afghan homes and the transfer of U.S. detainees to Afghan custody.

It seeks to create an enduring partnership that prevents the Taliban from waiting until the U.S. withdrawal to try to regain power, the senior administration officials said.

Obama previously visited Afghanistan in March 2010 and returned in December of the same year. He also visited Afghanistan in 2008 as a presidential candidate.

A new report issued Tuesday by the Pentagon said that sanctuaries for insurgents in neighboring Pakistan continue to be a problem for the coalition forces and Afghan government.

"The Taliban-led insurgency and its al Qaeda affiliates still operate with impunity from sanctuaries in Pakistan," the semi-annual report said, adding that "the insurgency's safe haven in Pakistan, as well as the limited capacity of the Afghan government, remain the biggest risks to the process of turning security gains into a durable and sustainable Afghanistan."

While the coalition is on track to turn security fully over to Afghan control, the insurgency "remains a resilient and determined enemy and will likely attempt to regain lost ground and influence this spring and summer through assassinations, intimidation, high-profile attacks and emplacement of improvised explosive devices," according to the report.

The report covers security developments in Afghanistan from October through March. It noted several "significant shocks" during that period, including release of a video of U.S. Marines urinating on corpses, the inadvertent burning of religious materials by U.S. personnel, several "green on blue" incidents in which coalition forces were killed or wounded by Afghan troops, and the alleged killing of 17 civilians by a lone U.S. soldier.

However, the report also noted that the insurgency has been "severely degraded" by Afghan and NATO combat operations, noting the "most significant security-related development" during the reporting period was the continuing decline in violence.

After five consecutive years in which enemy attacks had increased, they decreased by 9% in 2011 and by 16% so far in 2012.

The report attributed the improvement to the expansion and improved training of Afghan security forces. Afghans partner with coalition forces on 90% of coalition operations, taking the lead on about 40% of them, according to the military.

Along with the insurgent sanctuaries in Pakistan, the report noted that Iran is trying to ensure a "dominant, long-term role" for itself in Afghanistan along with the permanent withdrawal of foreign forces.

While much of Iran's activity involves openly reaching out with economic and cultural support, the report said there also is "covert support, including the provision of weapons and training for various insurgent and political opposition groups," including the Taliban.


Copyright 2012 by CNN NewSource. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

.
© 2012 © 2011






Oh great - another speech to glorify himself.   What a disaster this admn is. 

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #38 on: May 01, 2012, 01:14:27 PM »
I also remember mccain saying:

KING: If you were president and knew that bin Laden was in Pakistan, you know where, would you have U.S. forces go in after him?

MCCAIN: Larry, I'm not going to go there and here's why, because Pakistan is a sovereign nation. I think the Pakistanis would want bin Laden out of their hair and out of their country and it's causing great difficulties in Pakistan itself.


Oh look.  It's an excerpt posted on the Daily Kos.    ::)
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/02/972229/-John-McCain-said-he-wouldn-t-go-after-Bin-Laden-in-Pakistan

And the rest of his comment:

"But I want to assure you I will get Osama bin Laden as president of the United States and I will bring him to justice no matter what it takes."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0807/28/lkl.01.html

Dos Equis

  • Moderator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 63770
  • I am. The most interesting man in the world. (Not)
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #39 on: May 01, 2012, 01:15:33 PM »
Obama lands in Afghanistan in surprise visit

President Obama to make a televised address from Afghanistan

Author: By the CNN Wire Staff


Published On: May 01 2012 03:03:21 PM EDT Updated On: May 01 2012 04:00:46 PM EDT

Kevin Lamarque / Reuters


President Barack Obama shakes hands with U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Ryan Crocker upon his arrival at Bagram Air Base in Kabul, Afghanistan.
 KABUL, Afghanistan (CNN) -
President Barack Obama made an unannounced visit to Afghanistan on Tuesday, the first anniversary of the U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden in neighboring Pakistan.

On his third trip to Afghanistan since taking office, Obama met with President Hamid Karzai and will make a televised address at 7:30 p.m. ET.

Tuesday's visit comes at a particularly delicate time in relations between the United States and Afghanistan, as plans to withdraw U.S.-led international forces proceed.

The countries have been negotiating a strategic agreement that would outline the basis for U.S.-Afghan cooperation after most U.S. and allied troops withdraw in 2014. Obama and Karzai are expected to sign the agreement on Tuesday, according to the senior administration officials who briefed reporters on the flight.

The Strategic Partnership Agreement provides a framework for the U.S.-Afghanistan partnership for the decade following the U.S. and allied troop withdrawal, the officials said on condition of not being identified.

Specific levels of U.S. forces and funding are not set in the agreement and will be determined by the United States in consulation with alllies, the officials said.

Noting the anniversary of the bin Laden mission, the officials called it a resonant day for the Afghan and American people.

More than 130,000 troops from 50 countries serve in Afghanistan, according to the NATO-led International Security and Assistance Force. The United States is the biggest contributor, providing around 90,000 troops, followed by the United Kingdom (9,500), Germany (4,800) and France (3,600).

The war that began in 2001 is increasingly unpopular in the United States, with the latest CNN/ORC International poll in late March showing 25% of respondents supporting it while 72% opposed it.

More than 2,700 troops from the United States and its partners have died in the war, the majority of them American.

In 2011, the United States outlined its plan to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2014. The move was followed by withdrawal announcements by most of the NATO nations.

Last week, Afghan National Security Adviser Rangin Daftar Spanta and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker initialed a text that outlined the kind of relationship the two countries want in the decade following the NATO withdrawal.

The deal had been long expected after Washington and Kabul found compromises over the thorny issues of "night raids" by U.S. forces on Afghan homes and the transfer of U.S. detainees to Afghan custody.

It seeks to create an enduring partnership that prevents the Taliban from waiting until the U.S. withdrawal to try to regain power, the senior administration officials said.

Obama previously visited Afghanistan in March 2010 and returned in December of the same year. He also visited Afghanistan in 2008 as a presidential candidate.

A new report issued Tuesday by the Pentagon said that sanctuaries for insurgents in neighboring Pakistan continue to be a problem for the coalition forces and Afghan government.

"The Taliban-led insurgency and its al Qaeda affiliates still operate with impunity from sanctuaries in Pakistan," the semi-annual report said, adding that "the insurgency's safe haven in Pakistan, as well as the limited capacity of the Afghan government, remain the biggest risks to the process of turning security gains into a durable and sustainable Afghanistan."

While the coalition is on track to turn security fully over to Afghan control, the insurgency "remains a resilient and determined enemy and will likely attempt to regain lost ground and influence this spring and summer through assassinations, intimidation, high-profile attacks and emplacement of improvised explosive devices," according to the report.

The report covers security developments in Afghanistan from October through March. It noted several "significant shocks" during that period, including release of a video of U.S. Marines urinating on corpses, the inadvertent burning of religious materials by U.S. personnel, several "green on blue" incidents in which coalition forces were killed or wounded by Afghan troops, and the alleged killing of 17 civilians by a lone U.S. soldier.

However, the report also noted that the insurgency has been "severely degraded" by Afghan and NATO combat operations, noting the "most significant security-related development" during the reporting period was the continuing decline in violence.

After five consecutive years in which enemy attacks had increased, they decreased by 9% in 2011 and by 16% so far in 2012.

The report attributed the improvement to the expansion and improved training of Afghan security forces. Afghans partner with coalition forces on 90% of coalition operations, taking the lead on about 40% of them, according to the military.

Along with the insurgent sanctuaries in Pakistan, the report noted that Iran is trying to ensure a "dominant, long-term role" for itself in Afghanistan along with the permanent withdrawal of foreign forces.

While much of Iran's activity involves openly reaching out with economic and cultural support, the report said there also is "covert support, including the provision of weapons and training for various insurgent and political opposition groups," including the Taliban.


Copyright 2012 by CNN NewSource. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

.
© 2012 © 2011






Oh great - another speech to glorify himself.   What a disaster this admn is. 

He should have gone there over during the holidays instead of calling them from a Kailua beach house on Christmas. 

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #40 on: May 01, 2012, 01:21:14 PM »
LOL!

Obama upstages Mittens sucking up to rudy in NYC by spiking the football in afghanistan on this anniversary.

ouch.  gonna be an ugly campaign.   obama is quite a dick!

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #41 on: May 01, 2012, 01:23:54 PM »
LOL!

Obama upstages Mittens sucking up to rudy in NYC by spiking the football in afghanistan on this anniversary.

ouch.  gonna be an ugly campaign.   obama is quite a dick!


Obama is the most divisive dishonest piece of trash i have ever witnessed in this country.   

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #42 on: May 01, 2012, 02:58:44 PM »

Obama is the most divisive dishonest piece of trash i have ever witnessed in this country.   

go to mirror... that guy is a fuckin retard

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #43 on: May 01, 2012, 03:02:14 PM »
go to mirror... that guy is a fuckin retard

LOL - I am not potus.   Even Dana Milbank and arriana slammed obama today over his divisive and burn your bridges campaign tactics. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #44 on: May 01, 2012, 03:19:13 PM »
WHITE HOUSE INSIDER: Obama Hesitated – Panetta Issued Order to Kill Osama Bin Laden

 by Ulsterman on April 30, 2012 with 26 Comments in News




 


“What Valerie Jarrett, and the president, did not know is that Leon Panetta had already initiated a program that reported to him –and only him, involving a covert on the ground attack against the compound.”
 


ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED MAY 3RD, 2011
 
Note:  This update comes some 24 hours after our longtime Washington D.C. Insider first outlined shocking details of an Obama administration having been “overruled” by senior military and intelligence officials leading up to the successful attack against terrorist Osama Bin Laden.  What follows is further clarification of Insider’s insights surrounding that event.
 


______________________
 
Q: You stated that President Obama was “overruled” by military/intelligence officials regarding the decision to send in military specialists into the Osama Bin Laden compound.  Was that accurate?
 
A: I was told – in these exact terms, “we overruled him.” (Obama)  I have since followed up and received further details on exactly what that meant, as well as the specifics of how Leon Panetta worked around the president’s “persistent hesitation to act.”  There appears NOT to have been an outright overruling of any specific position by President Obama, simply because there was no specific position from the president to do so.  President Obama was, in this case, as in all others, working as an absentee president.


Read more in News

« Obama Lies – Mitt Romney Never Said He Wouldn’t Go After Osama Bin Laden

NAVY SEALS TELL OBAMA TO STOP USING THEM FOR POLITICS »


I was correct in stating there had been a push to invade the compound for several weeks if not months, primarily led by Leon Panetta, Hillary Clinton, Robert Gates, David Petraeus, and Jim Clapper.  The primary opposition to this plan originated from Valerie Jarrett, and it was her opposition that was enough to create uncertainty within President Obama.  Obama would meet with various components of the pro-invasion faction, almost always with Jarrett present, and then often fail to indicate his position.  This situation continued for some time, though the division between Jarrett/Obama and the rest intensified more recently, most notably from Hillary Clinton.  She was livid over the president’s failure to act, and her office began a campaign of anonymous leaks to the media indicating such.  As for Jarrett, her concern rested on two primary fronts.  One, that the military action could fail and harm the president’s already weakened standing with both the American public and the world.  Second, that the attack would be viewed as an act of aggression against Muslims, and further destabilize conditions in the Middle East.
 
Q: What changed the president’s position and enabled the attack against Osama Bin Laden to proceed?
 
A:  Nothing changed with the president’s opinion – he continued to avoid having one.  Every time military and intelligence officials appeared to make progress in forming a position, Jarrett would intervene and the stalling would begin again.  Hillary started the ball really rolling as far as pressuring Obama began, but it was Panetta and Petraeus who ultimately pushed Obama to finally act – sort of.  Panetta was receiving significant reports from both his direct CIA sources, as well as Petraeus-originating Intel.  Petraeus was threatening to act on his own via a bombing attack.  Panetta reported back to the president that a bombing of the compound would result in successful killing of Osama Bin Laden, and little risk to American lives.  Initially, as he had done before, the president indicated a willingness to act.  But once again, Jarrett intervened, convincing the president that innocent Pakistani lives could be lost in such a bombing attack, and Obama would be left attempting to explain Panetta’s failed policy.  Again Obama hesitated – this time openly delaying further meetings to discuss the issue with Panetta.  A brief meeting was held at this time with other officials, including Secretary Gates and members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but Gates, like Panetta, was unable to push the president to act.  It was at this time that Gates indicated to certain Pentagon officials that he may resign earlier than originally indicated – he was that frustrated.  Both Panetta and Clinton convinced him to stay on and see the operation through.
 

What happened from there is what was described by me as a “masterful manipulation” by Leon Panetta.  Panetta indicated to Obama that leaks regarding knowledge of Osama Bin Laden’s location were certain to get out sooner rather than later, and action must be taken by the administration or the public backlash to the president’s inaction would be “…significant to the point of political debilitation.”  It was at that time that Obama stated an on-ground campaign would be far more acceptable to him than a bombing raid.  This was intended as a stalling tactic, and it had originated from Jarrett.  Such a campaign would take both time, and present a far greater risk of failure.  The president had been instructed by Jarrett to inform Mr., Panetta that he would have sole discretion to act against the Osama Bin Laden compound.  Jarrett believed this would further delay Panetta from acting, as the responsibility for failure would then fall almost entirely on him.  What Valerie Jarrett, and the president, did not know is that Leon Panetta had already initiated a program that reported to him –and only him, involving a covert on the ground attack against the compound.  Basically, the whole damn operation was already ready to go – including the specific team support Intel necessary to engage the enemy within hours of being given notice.  Panetta then made plans to proceed with an on-ground assault. This information reached either Hillary Clinton or Robert Gates first (likely via militarycontacts directly associated with the impending mission) who then informed the other.  Those two then met with Panetta, who informed each of them he had been given the authority by the president to proceed with a mission if the opportunity presented itself.  Both Gates and Clinton warned Panetta of the implications of that authority – namely he was possibly being made into a scapegoat.  Panetta admitted that possibility, but felt the opportunity to get Bin Laden outweighed that risk.  During that meeting, Hillary Clinton was first to pledge her full support for Panetta, indicating she would defend him if necessary.  Similar support was then followed by Gates.  The following day, and with Panetta’s permission, Clinton met in private with Bill Daley and urged him to get the president’s full and open approval of the Panetta plan.  Daley agreed such approval would be of great benefit to the action, and instructed Clinton to delay proceeding until he had secured that approval.  Daley contacted Clinton within hours of their meeting indicating Jarrett refused to allow the president to give that approval.  Daley then informed Clinton that he too would fully support Panetta in his actions, even if it meant disclosing the president’s indecision to the American public should that action fail to produce a successful conclusion.  Clinton took that message back to Panetta and the CIA director initiated the 48 hour engagement order.  At this point, the President of the United States was not informed of the engagement order – it did not originate from him, and for several hours after the order had been given and the special ops forces were preparing for action into Pakistan from their position in Afghanistan, Daley successfully kept Obama and Jarrett insulated from that order.
 
This insulation ended at some point with an abort order that I believe originated from Valerie Jarrett’s office, and was then followed up by President Obama. This abort order was later explained as a delay due to weather conditions, but the actual conditions at that time would have been acceptable for the mission.  A storm system had been in the area earlier, but was no longer an issue.  Check the data yourself to confirm.  Jarrett, having been caught off guard, was now scrambling to determine who had initiated the plan.  She was furious, repeating the acronym “CoC” and saying it was not being followed.  This is where Bill Daley intervened directly.  The particulars of that intervention are not clear to me beyond knowing he did meet with Jarrett in his office and following that meeting, Valerie Jarrett was not seen in the West Wing for some time, and apparently no longer offered up any resistance to the Osama Bin Laden mission.  What did follow from there was one or more brief meetings between Bill Daley, Hillary Clinton, a representative from Robert Gates’ office, a representative from Leon Panetta’s office, and a representative from Jim Clapper’soffice.  I have to assume that these meetings were in essence, detailing the move to proceed with the operation against the Osama Bin Laden compound.  I have been told by more than one source that Leon Panetta was directing the operation with both his own CIA operatives, as well as direct contacts with military – both entities were reporting to Panetta only at this point, and not the President of the United States.  There was not going to be another delay as had happened 24 hour earlier.  The operation was at this time effectively unknown to President Barack Obama or Valerie Jarrett and it remained that way until AFTER it had already been initiated.  President Obama was literally pulled from a golf outing and escorted back to the White House to be informed of the mission.  Upon his arrival there was a briefing held which included Bill Daley, John Brennan, and a high ranking member of the military.  When Obama emerged from the briefing, he was described as looking “very confused and uncertain.”  The president was then placed in the situation room where several of the players in this event had already been watching the operation unfold.  Another interesting tidbit regarding this is that the Vice President was already “up to speed” on the operation.  A source indicated they believe Hillary Clinton had personally made certain the Vice President was made aware of that day’s events before the president was.  The now famous photo released shows the particulars of that of that room and its occupants.  What that photo does not communicate directly is that the military personnel present in that room during the operation unfolding, deferred to either Hillary Clinton or Robert Gates.  The president’s role was minimal, including their acknowledging of his presence in the room.
 
At the conclusion of the mission, after it had been repeatedly confirmed a success, President Obama was once again briefed behind closed doors.  The only ones who went in that room besides the president were Bill Daley. John Brennan, and a third individual whose identity remains unknown to me.  When leaving this briefing, the president came out of it “…much more confident. Much more certain of himself.”  He was also carrying papers in his hand that quite possibly was the address to the nation given later that evening on the Bin Laden mission.  The president did not have those papers with him prior to that briefing. The president then returned to the war room, where by this time, Leon Panetta had personally arrived and was receiving congratulations from all who were present.
 
In my initial communication to you of these events I described what unfolded as a temporary Coup initiated by high ranking intelligence and military officials. I stand by that term.  These figures worked around the uncertainty of President Obama and the repeated resistance of Valerie Jarrett.  If they had not been willing to do so, I am certain Osama Bin Laden would still be alive today.  There will be no punishment to those who acted outside the authority of the president’s office.  The president cannot afford to admit such a fact.  What will be most interesting from here is to now see what becomes of Valerie Jarrett.  One source indicated she is threatening resignation.  I find that unlikely given my strong belief she needs the protection afforded her by the Oval Office and its immense powers to delay and eventually terminate investigations back in Chicago, but we shall see.
 
Stay safe.
 
______________________
 
UPDATE 1:  WHITE HOUSE INSIDER NEWS – New Information Confirms Bin Laden Report From 2011
 
UPDATE 2  The following is a direct quote from Rush Limbaugh during his April 30th, 2012  radio program:
 
Uh, I wish I could cite my source for you. I can’t. I’m sworn to secrecy. But I’m just gonna tell you: They had to go call the president off the golf course and get him into that Situation Room an hour and a half before the attack so he was there for the photo-op.    LINK
 
______________________
 
MAY 2011 ORIGINAL BIN LADEN STORY

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #45 on: May 01, 2012, 07:07:23 PM »
Free Republic
Browse · Search   Pings · Mail   General/Chat
Topics · Post Article
Skip to comments.

Will The Navy SEALs Swift Boat Obama?
BuzzFeed ^ | 5/1/2012 | Michael Hastings
Posted on May 1, 2012 10:04:55 PM EDT by Signalman

Almost eight years ago, presidential candidate John Kerry accepted the Democratic nomination with the infamous line: “I’m John Kerry, and I’m reporting for duty.” His military service, in a war three decades old, became the centerpiece of his campaign.

Within weeks, the Republicans had turned what was seen as one of Kerry’s strongest assets against him. Swift Boats Veterans for Truth—which included over 200 Vietnam veterans, most who hadn’t even served with Kerry—succeeded in raising doubts about the heroic narrative Kerry was selling. What seemingly started as a scratch turned into a sucking chest wound for his campaign.

Yesterday, the Obama campaign got clawed.

Drudge blasted the headline from London's Daily Mail: SEALS SLAM OBAMA FOR MAKING IT POLITICAL.

What was supposed to be an easy win—a victory lap on the anniversary of Bin Laden’s death, trumping up the president’s most militant moment—appeared to be slipping away.

The frustration—or, even anger—within the SEAL community is real, and has been brewing for months, particularly among a politically conservative core of operators. It started immediately after the raid, with questions among the Special Forces and intelligence community of whether the president should have waited to announce the kill to exploit the intelligence cache at Osama’s compound. It simmered after a Chinook helicopter was shot down, killing 30 Americans, 22 of them Navy SEALs from Team Six.

Was it a coincidence, SEALs asked themselves, catastrophe hit Team Six so soon after being named as the team responsible for the killing?

The White House narrative on the Geronimo mission would soon come under scrutiny as well, after Chuck Pfarrer, a former member of Seal Team Six, published a book length account questioning the official version of the story. The controversial book was viciously attacked—a JSOC spokesperson called it a “fabrication”—and it was widely dismissed by the press.

What the pushback revealed, however, was an extreme sensitivity in the White House as to who would have the privilege to tell the Bin Laden story, best expressed in a compelling, if well stage-managed, story in the New Yorker. The piece recounted the Abbottabad raid based on interviews with senior administration and military officials, while imbuing the story with the drama of a SEAL’s eye view. Yet the author conceded he had not actually interviewed the men who did the shooting.

Over the past few days, I’ve reached out to a number of SEALs, both active duty and former. Most active duty SEALs were reluctant to go on the record venting or praising their boss, but one of the most interesting responses I received from an operator was to direct me to Leif Babin, a SEAL who left active duty last year.

Babin, who runs the consulting firm Echelon Front, wrote a little noticed op-ed in Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal four months ago. The headline: OBAMA EXPLOITS THE NAVY SEALS. Babin took aim at “the president and his advisors, writing: “It is infuriating to see political gain put above the safety and security of our brave warriors and our long-term strategic goals.”

Obama campaign officials say the decision to put the Bin Laden hit at the centerpiece of the re-elect effort is a no brainer. (It has featurd in the new "Forward" ad; Vice President Biden’s speech last week; and a Davis Guggenheim documentary narrated by Tom Hanks.) The raid dispels the archetype of the supposedly weak Democrat; it’s reveals a moment of presidential decisiveness; and the successful killing of the aging terrorist in his Pakistani hideout, ten years after 9-11, a clear cut national triumph. It's a topic the Obama camp is all too happy to discuss, at any length.

But as the stagey outrage over the politicization of foreign policy from Mitt Romney and his Republican allies gained momentum over this past weekend, White House officials started to have their doubts. Was spiking the football, again, and again, and again, in a public such a good idea? Was it necessary? Was the campaign in Chicago, White House officials wondered, going too far?

Like Kerry’s war record, the vulnerability to the president’s Bin Laden story isn’t so much from the other side, as it from those who can claim the mantle of veteran. It wouldn’t be surprising to see the website: navysealsagainstobama.co m sprout up soon. Sure, military servicemen are accustomed to being exploited by both the left and the right. But that strategy can have its weaknesses, too. If the assault on the Bin Laden narrative continues, and if the anger expressed in private by the SEALs remains very public, the campaign might be forced to retreat.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #46 on: May 01, 2012, 07:29:53 PM »

Skip to comments.

MORE BLOWBACK AGAINST OUR WHINEY, IMMODEST, AND SHAMELESSLY SELF-PROMOTING PRESIDENT
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/05/more-blowback-against-our-whiney-immodest-and-shamelessly-self-promoting-president.php ^
Posted on May 1, 2012 9:13:12 PM EDT by chessplayer

The blowback continues from President Obama’s overreaching attempt to turn the killing of Osama bin Laden into a weapon with which directly to attack Mitt Romney. First, some Navy SEALS, the outfit whose members risked their lives to kill bin Laden, took exception. Then, a key operative at the CIA, who helped secure intelligence that led us to bin Laden using practices opposed by Obama, balked.

"A recently disclosed memorandum from then-CIA Director Leon Panetta shows that the president’s celebrated derring-do in authorizing the operation included a responsibility-escape clause: “The timing, operational decision making and control are in Admiral McRaven’s hands. The approval is provided on the risk profile presented to the President. Any additional risks are to be brought back to the President for his consideration. The direction is to go in and get bin Laden and if he is not there, to get out.” Which is to say, if the mission went wrong, the fault would be Adm. McRaven’s, not the president’s."

Option D

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17367
  • Kelly the Con Way
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #47 on: May 02, 2012, 07:45:47 AM »
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


Get owned much?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-may-1-2012-david-barton

Look at the first segment... and PAY ATTENTION TO THE VIDEOS...AGAIN......THE VIDEOS....PLEASE, LOOK AT THE VIDEO CLIPS...


I gurantee fury or 333 will be atop the leader board..."but but but... its on a comedy show...."

Fury

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21026
  • All aboard the USS Leverage
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #48 on: May 02, 2012, 07:52:31 AM »
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


Get owned much?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-may-1-2012-david-barton

Look at the first segment... and PAY ATTENTION TO THE VIDEOS...AGAIN......THE VIDEOS....PLEASE, LOOK AT THE VIDEO CLIPS...


I gurantee fury or 333 will be atop the leader board..."but but but... its on a comedy show...."

I'm not even going to bother watching it, regardless of the fact that it's on the Daily Show. I can't think of the last time I watched a single clip posted on this board. Youtube, MSM "journalism" and satirical comedy shows are the equivalent of Wikipedia.

I think I'll side with the SEALs, including a former commander of ST6, who called out Obama on this. You can feel free to side with your comedian, though.  ;D

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39441
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: US Navy SEALS slam Obama for politicizing Bin Laden raid
« Reply #49 on: May 02, 2012, 07:54:31 AM »
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


Get owned much?

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/tue-may-1-2012-david-barton

Look at the first segment... and PAY ATTENTION TO THE VIDEOS...AGAIN......THE VIDEOS....PLEASE, LOOK AT THE VIDEO CLIPS...


I gurantee fury or 333 will be atop the leader board..."but but but... its on a comedy show...."


Don't you leftist drones realize who childish and ridiculous bringing up Bush is?  You guys considered him the worst president of all time remember?