Osama Bin Laden Dead

[MikeL]

I wasn't referring to the chopper itself, and I've also read the same thing about some new stealth helo.

Any source about this possible sealth tech to China?

was referring to this comment of yours

There is now a chance that stealth technology could fall into Chinese hands

 

[a_majoor]

There was a very quick thing on the news about the remains of the helicopter being taken by Pakistani authorities to an unknown location. China is a Pakistani ally, so the idea that Chinese experts will be allowed to examine the wreckage and take samples isn't too far fetched.

 

[StepDad]

Apparently India is now also very concerned that Pakistan could acquire that technology. The Indo-Pakistani Kashmir issue is still simmering in the background.

 

[Redeye]

Assuming that they did actually abide by Islamic traditions.... part of me would not be surprised if they simply kicked his body over the side of the ship followed by a few colourfull comments regarding his love for pork products

There's precedent for it with old enemies.  When the US Navy salvaged a Soviet submarine off Hawaii, the remains of some sailors were found aboard, they were given a funeral with full military honours even though they were sworn enemies.  Years later when the story was declassified the video was released to the families.

 

[Rifleman62]

Actually it was the Howard Hughes and the CIA in the Pacific Ocean far from Hawaii. The ship is still (at least a couple of years ago) mothballed in the Reserve Fleet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSF_Explorer

A few TV programs about this project. One showed the burial film shot at the time.

Interesting info here: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb305/index.htm

The Moscow Times

CIA Admits Cold War Salvage of Soviet Nuclear Sub

The Associated Press - 15 February 2010

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/cia-admits-cold-war-salvage-of-soviet-nuclear-sub/399707.html

WASHINGTON — In 1974, far out in the Pacific, a U.S. ship pretending to be a deep-sea mining vessel fished a sunken Soviet nuclear-armed submarine out of the ocean depths, took what it could of the wreck and made off to Hawaii with its purloined prize.

Now, Washington is owning up to Project Azorian, a brazen mission from the days of high-stakes — and high-seas — Cold War rivalry.

After more than 30 years of refusing to confirm the barest facts of what the world already knew, the CIA has released an internal account of Project Azorian, though with juicy details taken out. The account surfaced Friday at the hands of private researchers from the National Security Archive who used the Freedom of Information Act to achieve the declassification.

The document is a 50-page article quietly published in the fall 1985 edition of Studies in Intelligence, the CIA's in-house journal that outsiders rarely get to see.

In it, the CIA describes in chronological detail a mission of staggering expense and improbable engineering feats that culminated in August 1974 when the Hughes Glomar Explorer retrieved a portion of the submarine, K-129. The eccentric industrialist Howard Hughes lent his name to the project to give the ship cover as a commercial research vessel.

The Americans buried six lost Soviet mariners at sea, after retrieving their bodies in the salvage, and sailed off with a hard-won booty that turned out to be of questionable value.

Despite the declassified article, the greatest mysteries of Project Azorian remain buried five kilometers down and in CIA files: exactly what parts of the sub were retrieved, what intelligence was derived from them and whether the mission was a waste of time and money. Despite the veil over the project, its existence has been known for decades.

"It's a pretty meaty description of the operation from inception to death," said Matthew Aid, the researcher who had been seeking the article since 2007, when he learned of its publication thanks to a footnote he spotted in other documents. "But what's missing in the end is, what did we get for it? The answer is, we still don't know."

Much of the operation on the scene unfolded as Soviet vessels watched and sometimes buzzed the Glomar Explorer with helicopters. The Americans told the Soviets that they were conducting deep-sea mining experiments.

Journalists broke the story in 1975, led by Seymour Hersh, then of The New York Times, and columnist Jack Anderson. The CIA maintained its silence except for declassifying a videotape of the burial of the Soviet seamen that was turned over to President Boris Yeltsin in the early 1990s.

Now the CIA article, written by an unidentified participant in the operation, brings back to life a time of brinkmanship between two nuclear-armed superpowers as they raced to uncover each other's military secrets. That competition ranged from space, across continents, to the ocean depths.

For Washington, that meant sparing no expense to retrieve a mammoth vessel loaded with nuclear arms, codes and Soviet technology.

Yet the disclosed sections of the article hint that not much of value was found, just as long-ago reporting on the episode concluded.

It only claims "intangibly beneficial" results such as a boost in morale among intelligence officers and advances in heavy-lift technology at sea. The author argues that the value in mounting the operation was in proving it could be done — an assertion that does not point to a trove of intelligence.

"Lifting a submarine weighing approximately 1,750 tons from a depth of 16,500 feet [5,029 meters] had never been attempted or accomplished anywhere before," the article says. "A government or organization too timid to undertake calculable risks in pursuit of a proper objective would not be true to itself or to the people it serves."

To researchers, that sounds like bureaucratic justification for a project thought to have cost more than $1.5 billion in today's dollars.

Accounts vary about what was actually brought back. Years later, Russian officials concluded that the CIA recovered at least two nuclear-armed torpedoes, not much of a bounty. In other tellings, most of the vessel broke up and fell back to the ocean floor, yielding little. The article does not settle such questions.

Nor does it say why the submarine is thought to have gone down.

The saga began in March 1968 when K-129, carrying three ballistic missiles armed with nuclear warheads as well as its torpedoes, sank 2,510 kilometers northwest of Hawaii with all hands lost. It took six years to ready the Glomar Explorer, create a winching system and sail to the wreck.

The CIA article carefully recounts the engineering hurdles of the operation, discloses the fears of the U.S. crew that Soviets would try to land on the Glomar Explorer and confirms that plutonium contamination was found in the salvage, apparently leaking from retrieved torpedoes.

But much else on the salvage is redacted, and the CIA's story ends with the ship going to Hawaii, leaving out what was taken and its significance once investigated back on land.

 

[a_majoor]

The story changes yet again (with disturbing potential):

http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/05/05/is-the-obama-administration-setting-up-to-toss-the-seals-under-the-bus/?print=1

Is the Obama administration setting up to toss the SEALs under the bus?

Posted By Bryan Preston On May 5, 2011 @ 8:23 am In Politics | 58 Comments

That is one way, though surely not the only way, to read this story.  The gist: the administration is now admitting that it had no video feed during the most crucial 20-25 minutes of the bin Laden raid. But take note of a detail that’s hanging in the new new new version of events.

    A photograph released by the White House appeared to show the President and his aides in the situation room watching the action as it unfolded. In fact they had little knowledge of what was happening in the compound.

    Mr Panetta also told the network that the US Navy Seals made the final decision to kill bin Laden rather than the president.

    In an interview with PBS, Mr Panetta said: “Once those teams went into the compound I can tell you that there was a time period of almost 20 or 25 minutes where we really didn’t know just exactly what was going on. And there were some very tense moments as we were waiting for information.

    “We had some observation of the approach there, but we did not have direct flow of information as to the actual conduct of the operation itself as they were going through the compound.”

    Mr Panetta also told the network that the US Navy Seals made the final decision to kill bin Laden rather than the president. (emphasis mine)

It’s that last line that puts some distance now between the White House and the raid. The WH wasn’t actually watching, and the SEALs made the call to kill. Put that together with the information that came out yesterday about the disposition of the enemy within the compound.

    Several other details from the raid support the narrative that bin Laden felt a certain sense of security in his walled compound in northern Pakistan—there were no guards on site, and he was unarmed when the CIA-led Navy SEALs team dropped in Sunday to capture or kill him.

    The circumstances surrounding his final minutes are still a bit blurry. A senior U.S. official said that while he was unarmed, he appeared to be reaching for a weapon before being fatally shot.

Other accounts said one of the guards was armed, but the others and bin Laden were not. Of course, we’ll never see the actual order that sent the SEAL team in, so we’ll never know if it truly was a kill order. Most Americans wouldn’t care either way — bin Laden was one of that rare breed of thug who just needs killlin’. But this administration isn’t composed of “most Americans,” it’s composed of people who hold a skeptical view of American power, to say the least. And it’s not as if Obama hasn’t made a habit of throwing anyone and everyone under the bus as soon as they become inconvenient to him. And let’s face it: Obama’s voting base hates the military and has spent the entire war decrying every tactic the military and our intel agencies have used over the course of the war.

The Obama administration would be making a colossal mistake if it goes anywhere near turning on the SEALs who got bin Laden. But they have been making mistake after mistake since the successful raid. So I’m no longer confident they can manage to dodge making this one. And if your agenda of frittering away American power and influence remains in place, it’s not a mistake at all.

Plus: The New York Times Magazine suffers from a case of bad timing…and worse judgment.

Article printed from The PJ Tatler: http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler

URL to article: http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/05/05/is-the-obama-administration-setting-up-to-toss-the-seals-under-the-bus/

 

[Jarnhamar]

We (US, Nato) always step on our dicks by releasing false statements and trying to cover stuff up initially. Like killing some kids by accident, it took a while for Nato to admit that the insurgents were really 9 and 14 year old kids or whatever.  Osama didn't have a gun so why bother to say he did? Obviously it's gonna come out in the wash that he didn't. Who cares, we killed him because he deserved to die and it makes humanity a better and safer place.  One of the first things you learn in Afghanistan is that just because someone doesn't have an AK pointing at you doesn't mean they are "unarmed".

I'm glad we didn't drop a cruise missle on him.  I'm glad he knew we were coming.  We owed that 25 minutes of fear to the 2,752 souls we lost in the towers and planes used to bring them down, and the fear they suffered leading up to their death. 
Not to forget as well, the hundreds and thousands of other soldiers and civilians who suffered because of Osama's actions.

 

[PanaEng]

The story changes yet again (with disturbing potential):

http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/05/05/is-the-obama-administration-setting-up-to-toss-the-seals-under-the-bus/?print=1

That article is pure garbage.

The only ones in the history of the US (as far as I know) that have turned in someone in the intelligence/SO community was the previous administration - for purely political and vindictive purposes.
Obama does represent the majority of Americans - he got elected, didn't he? without the chad fiasco and other manipulations.

CHIMO!

 

[Rifleman62]

Questions, questions, questions!

Do you remember seeing the black & white video of the actual events of Black Hawk Down?  That video was viewed as it happened at the HQ.

The special DVD issue of the movie has this as a feature. Several TV programs also (Frontline on PBS). I believe the SEALS video would be similar.

So now we have the military experienced deficit Democrat President and his staff supposedly watching the video of the SEALS in action, with a transmission delay of possibly several seconds, a Presidential thought process delay, and a delay to transmit a message to the SEALS if possible. So what is the President going to say? "Don't Shoot".

I believe it was another Democrat President, Clinton, that reportedly has Osama in the sights of a CIA drone, and he said don't shoot. There is video of this.

Remember it was another Democrat President, Johnson and his staff reviewing the targets to Bomb in Vietnam and the missed opportunities?

"...made the call..." implies that "kill" was in the OO.

Who wants a politician looking over their shoulders as you are about to kick in a door? May be the SEALS didn't and "lost contact".

Nobody was armed in the compound? Want to buy beach property?

 

[Rifleman62]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ambush/

The 3 - Disc Deluxe Edition DVD of Black Hawk Down:

Edition Details:

    Commentary by producer Jerry Bruckheimer and director Ridley Scott, author Mark Bowden and screenwriter Ken Nolan, andTask Force Ranger Veterans
    Theatrical trailer(s), TV spot(s)
   
    The Essence of Combat: Making Black Hawk Down: 1. Getting It Right 2. Crash Course 3. Battlefield Morocco 4. Hymn to the Fallen 5. Digital Warriors 6. After Action Report
    8 deleted & alternate scenes with optional commentary
    Production design archive
    Storyboards with optional commentary
    Ridleygrams with optional commentary
    Jerry Bruckheimer's Black Hawk Down photo album
    Title design explorations with optional commentary
    Photo galleries
    The History Channel Presents: The True Story of Black Hawk Down
    PBS Presents: Frontline: Ambush in Mogadishu
    Interactive mission map/timeline
    Target building insertion - multi-angle sequence with optional commentary
    Question & Answer Forums: BAFTA (Ridley Scott, Jerry Bruckheimer, Josh Hartnett, Ewen McGregor, Jason Isaaca, Mark Bowden & Tom Matthews), Motion Pictures Editor's Guild (Pietro Scalia), American Cinematheque (Jerry Bruckheimer & Ridley Scott)
    "Gortoz A Ran - J'Attends" music video performed by Denez Prigent & Lisa Gerrard
    Theatrical poster concepts

DVD Release Date: 06/10/03

 

[Old Sweat]

I am not surprised by the "unexplained" loss of communications during the crucial phase of the assault. If I was commanding the assault, the last thing I would want or need is the chain of command second guessing me and interjecting conflicting orders as my troops were fighting their way into the enemy's stronghold. Remember in the takedown of the Somali pirates that authority to execute the rescue was reportedly delayed for several hours because the National Command Authority could not be satisfied that the pirates were in fact presenting a danger to the hostage. This lesson may, repeat may, not have been gone unnoticed by the SOF community.

To my mind, and this is purely a personal assessment, once the decision is taken to mount the operation, authority to resolve it must rest with the on scene commander.

Edit to add: This also provides arm's length involvement for the chain of command, in case one of the links in said chain wishes to duck for cover because of an unfavorable outcome.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Yes, indeed. See turning a blind eye.

 

[JMesh]

From the CBC:

Al-Qaeda confirms bin Laden's death
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/05/06/al-qaeda-osama-050611.html

Al-Qaeda confirmed Friday the killing of Osama bin Laden and warned of retaliation, saying Americans' "happiness will turn to sadness."

The confirmation came in an Internet statement posted on militant websites, signed by "the general leadership" of al-Qaeda. The announcement opens the way for the group to name a successor to bin Laden. His deputy Ayman al-Zawahri is now the most prominent figure in the group and is a very likely contender to take his place.

More at link

 

[a_majoor]

Intelligence work on the materials found in the compound:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/5/evidence-at-bin-ladens-home-raises-nuclear-concern/print/

Evidence at bin Laden’s home raises nuclear concerns
Pakistani government links suspected

A supporter of a Pakistani religious group Jamaat-e-Islami burns a tire during an anti-American rally Friday in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Osama bin Laden was killed by a helicopter-borne U.S. military force on Monday, in a fortress-like compound on the outskirts of Abbottabad. (Associated Press)A supporter of a Pakistani religious group Jamaat-e-Islami burns a tire during an anti-American rally Friday in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Osama bin Laden was killed by a helicopter-borne U.S. military force on Monday, in a fortress-like compound on the outskirts of Abbottabad. (Associated Press)

By Eli Lake

The Washington Times

9:46 p.m., Thursday, May 5, 2011
MugshotPakistan army soldiers and a police officer patrol past the house (background) where al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden was killed by U.S. forces on Sunday, ending a nearly 10-manhunt after the Sept. 11 attacks on U.S. soil. (Associated Press)

Intelligence analysts are sifting through phone numbers and email addresses found at Osama bin Laden's compound to determine potential links to Pakistani government and military officials while U.S. officials and analysts raise concerns about the safety of Pakistan's nuclear materials.

According to three U.S. intelligence officials, the race is on to identify what President Obama's top counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, has called bin Laden's "support system" inside Pakistan. These sources sought anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to reporters.

"My concern now is that we cannot exclude the possibility that officers in the Pakistani military and the intelligence service were helping to harbor or aware of the location of bin Laden," said Olli Heinonen, who served as the deputy director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from 2005 to 2010.

"What is to say they would not help al Qaeda or other terrorist groups to gain access to sensitive nuclear materials such as highly enriched uranium and plutonium?"

The U.S. has worried quietly about the infiltration of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and military for years. Those concerns heightened in recent months when the CIA learned that bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad was a stone's throw from Pakistan's military academy.

Politico first reported this week that CIA Director Leon E. Panetta told members of Congress that bin Laden's clothing had two phone numbers sewn into it at the time of the raid. Those numbers and other contacts found at the compound are key clues in an effort to determine what elements of Pakistan's national security establishment provided support to bin Laden and al Qaeda.

"I can tell you that concern about al Qaeda and other terrorists' infiltration into the ISI is not new on the part of the Congress or the [George W.] Bush and Obama administrations," said Rep. Steve Rothman, a New Jersey Democrat who serves on two House Appropriations subcommittees that fund defense and foreign aid.

Mr. Rothman has attended top-secret briefings on the Abbottabad raid and the impact of the raid on Afghanistan and Pakistan.

"As a matter of course, and for good reason, the materials that were removed from bin Laden's home in Pakistan are being run down for leads that could assist the United States in apprehending individuals or entities who have sought to harm Americans or who have enabled others to harm Americans," he said.

Another U.S. intelligence official told The Washington Times that other phone numbers and emails were recovered in the raid.

Mr. Rothman said al Qaeda operatives in 2009 "came within 60 kilometers of what is believed to have been Pakistan's nuclear arsenal," though he could not elaborate on the incident.

"Two years ago, al Qaeda came close, too close for comfort," Mr. Rothman said. "That resulted ... in new safeguards and new measures taken by the United States and Pakistan and others to minimize any possibility of anyone acquiring the Pakistani nuclear weapons or material."

Pakistan is neither a member of the IAEA nor a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Nonetheless, it has agreed to some IAEA safeguards on its civil nuclear program, but nothing comprehensive.

Analysts estimate Pakistan to have more than 100 nuclear weapons. The latest estimate by Princeton University's International Panel on Fissile Materials, which takes account of the world's nuclear material, estimates that Pakistan possesses between 1.6 tons and 3.8 tons of weapons-grade uranium and between 132 pounds and 286 pounds of plutonium.

"Up to now, the Pakistanis have said the nuclear material is under military and ISI control and particularly the plutonium and highly enriched uranium," Mr. Heinonen said. "These are from facilities that are not under IAEA control at all."

A Feb. 19, 2009, cable from the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad said the nuclear arsenal is "under the control of the secular military, which has implemented extensive physical, personnel and command and control safeguards."

"Our major concern has not been that an Islamic militant could steal an entire weapon but rather the chance someone working in [Pakistani government] facilities could gradually smuggle enough fissile material out to eventually make a weapon and the vulnerability of weapons in transit," said the cable, which was released Wednesday by the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks.

The cable was prepared in anticipation of the February 2009 visit to Washington of Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, who is chief of staff of Pakistan's military. In it, the cable also acknowledged how the ISI and Pakistani army have elements that still support terrorist groups.

"We need to lay down a clear marker that Pakistan's Army/ISI must stop overt or tacit support for militant proxies. ... We should preface that conversation with an agreement to open a new page in relations; Kayani, who was ISI Chief from 2004-2007, does not want a reckoning with the past," the cable said.

The details on bin Laden's compound already have led some members of Congress to threaten to cut off military aid to Pakistan, which receives more than $3 billion annually from the U.S.

Mr. Rothman said he wants to use U.S. military aid to gain more leverage with Pakistan's government.

"We should continue to use whatever foreign and military aid to Pakistan ... in order to help guide the Pakistanis into creating the kind of stability and cooperation we are looking for from them on a consistent basis," he said.

© Copyright 2011 The Washington Times, LLC.

 

[Redeye]

That article is pure garbage.

The source ("Pajamas Media") tells you that before you even waste any time reading it.  Literally everything they produce is garbage.  They make the Weekly World News or Canada Free Press look like a credible news source.  Actually, no.  CFP is worse, but not by much.

The fact that President Obama's headed to Fort Campbell to meet the folks from 160th SOAR who participated to congratulate them before an event for troops recently returned from Afghanistan suggests that in this particular case.  So does the fact that virtually no one in the USA gives a rat's arse whether he was armed or not, they were quite happy that he was killed.  Even some of the most liberal folks I know down there are pretty strongly in agreement.

 

[vonGarvin]

So does the fact that virtually no one in the USA gives a rat's arse whether he was armed or not, they were quite happy that he was killed.  Even some of the most liberal folks I know down there are pretty strongly in agreement.

Would they have been so liberal had GW ordered "the hit?"

 

[Jammer]

I didn't think George Wallace possessed so much power.

 

[Scott]

I didn't think George Wallace possessed so much power.

Shh. Not many outside Army.ca know this...George might not even be aware...best to keep that quiet. Look what happened to the Technoviking once he found out who he really was...

 

[dapaterson]

President Obama presented the unitsd involved with a Presidential Unit Citation today (http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2011/05/06/osama-bin-laden-raid-firefight.html?ref=rss), five days later.  Compare and contrast this to the Canadian system for timeliness of recognition...

 

[Redeye]

Would they have been so liberal had GW ordered "the hit?"

As a hypothetical it'll be hard to get a true assessment but I'll put the question out and see what answers I get. In at least a couple of cases, no. It probably would hce helped how history judges Mr. Bush's administration.

David Frum had interesting point on his site - why does Obama get credit for the success of the raid (success, as evidenced today in his address at Fort Campbell - that he readily deflects)? Simple. Because if it had failed he would have taken the blame. Can't have one without the other.

I do have to laugh at how major figures on the American right are falling all over themselves to try to make the President out to be someone trying to milk it for political gain. They've been looking like morons doing so, much like the guy who wrote the drivelous PJM piece referred to above. There was no "victory lap" when the President made a solemn visit to Ground Zero and met with families and fire fighters. No gloating, no banners, no flightsuits and aircraft carriers. That is what is impressing me most about the whole thing.