The raid to get Osama - new book claims the official account was riddled with errors

Body language says a lot about what you are really thinking, feeling and what your true self is all about. Those who interview people for a living have studied the science of body language and how it can be very revealing indicator of what is true.

We are getting a classic version of this in the news that the raid that took out Osama Bin Laden didn't go exactly as portrayed by the Obama Administration. Not only that, but that the President was out playing golf up until just 20 minutes before the US Navy Seals began the mission. Much has been made about the President being disengaged and this is a striking example of how our military was on mission and risking it large, while the "Doofus in Charge" could barely pull himself away from his golf game. What a putz.

Back to body language...the enclosed picture shows that while Admiral Mike Mullen and others were composed while watching events unfold during the raid, President Obama looks as he is about to throw up. The look on his face is unmistakeably grim. His face and the look on Hillary Clinton's face show they are the two "lightweights" in the room. The rest of the staff and military look professional and determined. They have been there before and understand what it means. Obama looks worried and that he is in way over his head.

Either way, the new story of the raid that got Osama is telling as the Obama administration ginned up a fairy tale for the press which has been "adjusted" several time since May. It is a sign that not only is Obama a rank amateur, but a deceitful one too.

The US Navy Seals don't do what they do for glory or fame. They are dedicated to protecting the country, their oath to defend the Constitution and do not seek the spotlight. The President is the diametric opposite as in his world, it is always all about himself.

Bravo Zulu to the US Navy Seals and our fine military. To the President, in about a year, you'll find you'll have plenty of time to play golf as the voters will ensure you are a one-term President.


Revealed: How Obama was playing golf until 20 minutes before Navy SEALs began mission to take out Bin Laden

He stayed out on golf course to distance himself if it went wrong, book claims by Daniel Bates / UK Mail - 7th November 2011

Strain etched on his face, Barack Obama watched as the raid to kill Osama bin Laden played out on a television in front of him.

According to a new book, however, the President was not nearly that engaged – and was actually playing golf until 20 minutes before the operation began in earnest.

Only then did he down his clubs and return to the White House to watch what he later trumpeted as a great success of his presidency.

A new book claims the official account was riddled with errors and that Bin Laden was referred to as 'Bert' and not just 'Geronimo'.

Also, none of the Navy SEALs said the now famous words: 'For God and country', and when they burst into Bin Laden's room, his wife screamed: 'No, no, don't do this... it’s not him!'

The claims are from Chuck Pfarrer, a former SEAL team commander, in a book called SEAL Target Geronimo.

He has spoken to several of the men who carried out the operation at Bin Laden's mansion hideout in Abbottabad, Pakistan, on May 2.

Mr Pfarrer paints a very different picture to the official photo released at the time which shows Mr Obama and advisers huddled round a table in the White House situation room as footage was beamed from a drone 15,000ft above the al-Qaeda leader's mansion.

Mr Pfarrer says the President's role was largely inflated and suggests he stayed out on the golf course for so long so he could distance himself in case it went wrong. Mr Pfarrer writes: 'If this had completely gone south, he was in a position to disavow.'

He says the White House photographs did not show the moment that Bin Laden was killed, but the moment a helicopter went down, which happened after the shooting.

Mr Obama is known to be a keen golfer. Just today, as the White House was being encircled by 8,000 environmental protesters, he was on a course in Fort Belvoir, Virginia. The President also played golf four times during his week-long family holiday on Martha's Vineyard.

The book also claims that bin Laden would have been captured if he gave himself up. Mr Pfarrer said a SEAL team would not have been sent in for a kill mission, adding: 'If it was a kill mission you don't need SEAL Team 6; you need a box of hand grenades.'

The book also gives a dramatic new insight into what happened during the 1am raid, during which only 12 bullets were fired.

Within 90 seconds of their helicopter landing, the SEALs saw Bin Laden slam his bedroom door shut. Two SEALs burst in and saw Bin Laden and one of his four wives, Amal, who shouted: 'It's not him!'

Contrary to White House statements that he was unarmed, Bin Laden had a gun next to him. As he shoved his wife at the SEALs, four shots were fired.

The first round whistled past Bin Laden’s face. The second grazed his wife's calf. Mr Pfarrer claims: 'Two 5.56mm Predator bullets slammed into him. One struck him next to his breastbone, blowing apart his aorta. The last went through his skull.'

He also reveals that Bin Laden was known as Bert to the Seals, and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri was Ernie – a reference to the Sesame Street puppets.

The SEALS have decided to speak out after being enraged by the image that was being painted of them as cold-blooded murderers on a 'kill mission'.

Pfarrer said: 'I’ve been a SEAL for 30 years and I never heard the words ''kill mission''.
The soldiers were also said to be disappointed that Obama announced Bin Laden's death on TV a few hours later, making their intelligence-gathering futile.


Mr Pfarrer also said the President's announcement of the 'intentional' killing was understandable but nonetheless disappointing.

Mr Pfarrer told the Sunday Times: 'There isn’t a politician in the world who could resist trying to take credit for getting Bin Laden but it devalued the ''intel'' and gave time for every other Al-Qaeda leader to scurry to another bolthole.

'The men who did this and their valorous act deserve better. It’s a pretty shabby way to treat these guys.'

The operation began to come together in January 2010 after it was discovered that a 'high-value individual' was hiding out at a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

The commanding officer of the SEALS was brought to a top secret meeting with the CIA and his boss Admiral William McRaven to prepare a plan to present to the President.

CIA intelligence confirmed they were '60 per cent or 70 per cent certain it’s our guy'.
Satellite images had measured the target's shadow, making him 'over 6ft tall'. He was dubbed 'the pacer' as he was constantly seen walking back and forth.


In the following months, the team of SEALS began to make detailed preparations including practising manoeuvres at a mock-up of the compound at a remote army camp.

It was planned that the team would use Ghost Hawk helicopters because they were so quiet on approach, the Seals described them as flying in 'whisper mode', according to Mr Pfarrer.
Mr Obama gave the mission the green light and SEAL Team 6, known as the Jedi, kicked into action.

After being deployed to Afghanistan, the team were told to use older helicopters, Stealth Hawks, as sending in Ghost Hawks without the back up of jet fighters was considered too risky. Decoy targets were set up and the U.S. Navy scrambled Pakistan's radar to protect the mission.

The operation, called Neptune's Spear, was meant to take place on April 30 but was rescheduled for May 1 because of bad weather. In the dead of night, the SEALS flew on two Stealth Hawks, codenamed Razor 1 and 2, followed by two Chinooks five minutes behind.

Each SEAL was wearing body armour and night-vision goggles and equipped with laser targets, radios and sawn-off M4 rifles.

Also on board were a CIA agent, a Pakistani- American interpreter and a sniffer dog called Karo, wearing dog body armour and goggles.

It was estimated that around 30 people were in the high-walled compound in Abbottabad - Bin Laden and three of his wives, two sons, Khalid and Hamza, his courier, Abu Ahmed al- Kuwaiti, four bodyguards and a number of children.

At 56 minutes past midnight the compound came into sight and the code 'Palm Beach' gave the signal they were three minutes to landing.

The first helicopter hovered over the main house, where Bin Laden was known to live on the top floor. A team of 12 SEALS abseiled the 5ft-6ft down onto the roof, leapt onto a terrace and kicked in the windows.

The first person they saw was Bin Laden’s third wife Khaira. She fell after being blinded by a strobe light and was caught by a SEAL who pinned her to the floor.

Bin Laden suddenly appeared in the doorway of a bedroom along the hall and then slammed the door.

One SEAL radioed: 'Geronimo, Geronimo, Geronimo' signalling that they had spotted the target.

As people started moving in other parts of the house and lights were thrown on, Bin Laden's son Khalid came running up the stairs towards the SEALS and was shot dead.

Two commandos kicked in Bin Laden's door to find the al-Qaeda leader cowering behind his youngest wife Amal.

As Bin Laden tried to reach for his AK-47 rifle, the SEALS opened fire.
One round hit the mattress, another grazed Amal in the calf.

They each fired again: one shot hit Bin Laden's breastbone, the other his skull, blowing out the back of his head. His dead body slumped to the floor and he lay face up - just 90 seconds after the mission began.

Earlier reports had suggested that Bin Laden was not killed until after a protracted gun fight.

The second helicopter had headed to a smaller guesthouse in the compound where Bin Laden’s courier, Kuwaiti, and his brother lived.

As the helicopter closed in, a man appeared in the door with an assault rife and began to fire. Someone on board shouted 'Bust him!' A sniper on board the chopper fired two shots and Kuwaiti was killed along with his wife standing behind him.

Within two minutes the SEALS had cleared the guesthouse and removed the women and children. They then ran to meet their colleagues at the main building, firing two bullets into one of Bin Laden's bodyguards who was brandishing a gun.

Five minutes later, a Chinook landed by the compound and more commandos flooded into the compound.

The commanding officer went to view Bin Laden's corpse before confirming via satellite phone to the White House 'Geronimo Echo KIA' - that their number one enemy was dead.

Pfarrer added: 'This was the first time the White House knew he was dead and it was probably 20 minutes into the raid.'

A sample of Bin Laden’s DNA was taken, the body was bagged and put on the helicopter. His rifle is now mounted on the wall of their team room at their headquarters in Virginia Beach, Virginia.

On leaving the compound the first helicopter had an electrical failure and crashed tail-first into the compound.

SEALS initially thought it had been shot down as they rushed to help the crew who escaped

The Sunday Funnies

Or not-so-funnies, depending on your point of view....

Pakistan - They've gone " a shade too far "

The " Whacky Pakis" have been playing a shell game/three-card-monty with us for years...It is only recently that we have decided to call them out in public. What happens when the day comes were the fools in charge in Pakistan can no longer control the "rabid dogs" they allow to live there and the terrorists get their hands on a few Nukes ? You want to talk about a real shite-storm.....

I have been and remain convinced that we need to keep up all due pressure on these feckless idjits as they are in league with terrorist and expose themselves and others to a large threat because of their stupidity...As long as they feel they can act out w/o consequence, we'll keep sending in the drones to eliminate the threats we can identify.


Pakistan Is the Enemy
We know that Pakistan's intelligence service is aiding terrorists. What are we going to do about it?
By Christopher Hitchens - Salon
Monday, Sept. 26, 2011


In Joseph Heller's Catch-22, Lt. Milo Minderbinder transforms the mess accounts of the American airbase under his care into a "syndicate" under whose terms all servicemen are potential stakeholders. But this prince of entrepreneurs and middlemen eventually becomes overexposed, especially after some incautious forays into Egyptian cotton futures, and is forced to resort to some amoral subterfuges. The climactic one of these is his plan to arrange for himself to bomb the American base at Pianosa (for cost plus 6 percent, if my memory serves) with the contract going to the highest bidder. It's only at this point that he is deemed to have gone a shade too far.

In his electrifying testimony before Congress last week, Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has openly admitted to becoming the victim of a syndicate scheme that makes Minderbinder's betrayal look like the action of a small-time operative. In return for subventions of millions of American dollars, it now turns out, the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence agency (the ISI) can "outsource" the bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, and several other NATO and Afghan targets, to a related crime family known as the Haqqani network. Coming, as it does, on the heels of the disclosure about the official hospitality afforded to Osama Bin Laden, this reveals the Pakistani military-intelligence elite as the most adroit double-dealing profiteer from terrorism in the entire region.

Annoyed even so by the loss of "deniability" that Mullen's testimony entails, the Pakistani officer class has resorted to pretending that its direct relationships with al-Qaida and the Haqqani syndicate do not exist, and that in any case any action or protest resulting would constitute a violation of its much-vaunted "sovereignty." Both of these claims are paper-thin, or worse. If we employ Bertrand Russell's argument of "evidence against interest," for example, we can find absolutely no motive for Mullen— flanked as he was by Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta—to have been making such an allegation falsely. To the contrary, they had every reason to wish to avoid the conclusion they have been forced to draw. It makes utter and abject nonsense of the long-standing official claim that Washington's collusion with the ISI has been conducted in good faith and directed for a common cause. It shows American prestige and resources being used, not to diminish the power of "rogue" elements in the Pakistani system, but to enhance and empower them. It makes us look like fools and suckers, which is what we have become, unable to defend even our own troops, let alone civilian staff and facilities, from deadly assaults not just from the back but—flagrantly, unashamedly—from the front.

As for Pakistan's arrogant and insufferable riposte, to the effect that this is all part of its tender concept of its own "internal affairs," it barely adds insult to injury. On Sept. 12 , 2001, the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1368, condemning the attacks on American soil and asserting the universal right of self-defense. The terms of the resolution explicitly state that those found to be "supporting or harboring the perpetrators, organizers and sponsors of these acts will be held equally accountable." This unambiguous language, which secured the votes of Muslim countries like Bangladesh and Tunisia as well as those of the five permanent members of the Security Council and many other nations, deserves to get more repeated exposure than it has been receiving. Pakistan's provision of a military safe-house for the leader of al-Qaida is as comprehensive a breach of the spirit and letter of Resolution 1368 as could be imagined. Meanwhile the Haqqani gang, operating in open collaboration with the Taliban of Mullah Omar as well as other insanitary forces, easily meets the definition of an organization that helps sponsor and succor the original perpetrators.

Mullen's evidence, then, is one of those revelations that appears to necessitate action. Either the Pakistanis must permit an unobstructed run at the Haqqani bases that are used for the subversion of Pakistan as well as the re-Talibanization of Afghanistan, or they must at the very least lose their claim on the U.S. Treasury. At the most, they must take the risk of being identified as allies and patrons of those who deliberately murder coalition forces as well as Afghan and Pakistani civilians. This indictment would easily stretch to cover another gross violation of international law and diplomatic immunity, in that the ISI was also found culpable in the destruction of the Indian Embassy in Kabul in July 2008.

There was a time, when he was a presidential candidate, that Barack Obama was "clear" (as he so much likes to put it) about the way in which Pakistani actions might have real consequences for Pakistan. In early debates with Hillary Clinton and John McCain, he expressed a willingness to undertake some version of hot pursuit, if necessary into lawless regions of Pakistan, in order to deter and punish cross-border aggression. The raid on Bin Laden's home in Abbottabad, conducted in May under the radar of Bin Laden's overt protectors, gave expression to this determination. So what will President Obama do, now that the Pakistani political leadership has openly declared its whole state to be lawless, and outside the jurisdiction of U.N. resolutions, and available as a base for terrorist operations against our Afghan and Indian friends?

In this context, the murder last week of Burhanuddin Rabbani, the former Afghan warlord-president who headed the country's so-called "High Peace Council," may not necessarily be the "blow" to any "peace process" that truly merits the phrase. We allow ourselves to forget that many Afghans are deeply suspicious of a negotiation that refers to the Taliban—in President Hamid Karzai's euphemistic words—as lost or alienated "brothers." In this skeptical camp belong many of the Hazara and Tajik populations, many independent women's groups, and some unsuccessful contestants, such as Abdullah Abdullah, of the scandalously bought and rigged elections of a few months ago.

These people see no reason why Pakistan's vicious proxies should be allowed, by surreptitious back channels, to gain what they have so far failed to get on the battlefield. But they do not feel that the United States is sympathetic to them, and they naturally wince when they see our embrace of their enemies. That is why the overdue decision to call these enemies by their right names is so potentially significant, and will, one hopes, soon be followed by a complete breach with those we have been so humiliatingly subsidizing to sabotage us.

Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair and the author, most recently, of Arguably, a collection of essays.

Whacki-Pakis find out about the " Golden Rule "

Looks like the Whacki-Pakis have found out about the old adage of the " Golden Rule " -

As in " HE who holds the GOLD makes the rules...."

About time we held the feckless idiots in Pakistan responsible for their collective stupidity in allowing the Taliban to have free rein along the AF/PAK border...They are lucky we don't send a lot more of our Predator Drones in there to level things that make us unhappy....

With the way they run things, it ought to be like shooting fish in a barrel.

US withholding millions in aid to Pakistan
By Eric Schmitt and Jane Perlez
New York Times / July 10, 2011

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration is suspending and, in some cases, canceling hundreds of millions of dollars of aid to the Pakistani military, in a move to chasten Pakistan for expelling American military trainers and to press its army to fight militants more effectively.

Tweet Be the first to Tweet this!ShareThis Coupled with a statement from the top American military officer last week linking Pakistan’s military spy agency to the recent murder of a Pakistani journalist, the halting or withdrawal of military equipment and other aid to Pakistan illustrates the depth of the debate inside the Obama administration over how to change the behavior of one of its key counterterrorism partners.

About $800 million in military aid and equipment, or over one-third of the more than $2 billion in annual American security assistance to Pakistan, could be affected, three senior United States officials said.

This aid includes about $300 million to reimburse Pakistan for some of the costs of deploying more than 100,000 soldiers along the Afghan border to combat terrorism, as well as hundreds of millions of dollars in training assistance and military hardware, according to half a dozen congressional, Pentagon, and other administration officials who were granted anonymity to discuss the politically delicate matter.

“When it comes to our military aid,’’ Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told a Senate committee last month “we are not prepared to continue providing that at the pace we were providing it unless and until we see certain steps taken.’’

American officials say they would probably resume equipment deliveries and aid if relations improve and Pakistan pursues terrorists more aggressively. The cutoffs do not affect any immediate deliveries of military sales to Pakistan, like F-16 fighter jets, or nonmilitary aid, the officials said.

While some senior administration officials have concluded that Pakistan will never be the kind of partner the administration hoped for when President Obama entered office, others emphasize that the United States cannot risk a full break in relations or a complete cutoff of aid akin to what happened in the 1990s, when Pakistan was caught developing nuclear weapons.

But many of the recent aid curtailments are clearly intended to force the Pakistani military to make a difficult choice between backing the country that finances much of its operations and equipment, or continuing to provide secret support for the Taliban and other militants fighting American soldiers in Afghanistan.

“We have to continue to emphasize with the Pakistanis that in the end it’s in their interest to be able to go after these targets as well,’’ Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta told reporters on Friday en route to Afghanistan.

In private briefings to senior congressional staff members last month, however, Pentagon officials made clear that the administration was taking a tougher line toward Pakistan and seriously reassessing whether it could still be an effective partner in fighting terrorists.

“They wanted to tell us, ‘Guys, we’re delivering the message that this is not business as usual and we’ve got this under control,’ ’’ one senior Senate aide said.

Comments last week by Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also reflected a potentially more confrontational approach to Pakistan. Mullen became the first US official to publicly accuse Pakistan of ordering the kidnapping, torture, and death of the journalist, Saleem Shahzad, whose mutilated body was found in early June.

Just for clarification.....The "reality" of who we are fighting here in the AF/PAK region

I want to clarify something to the pointy headed idjits in the press and those inside the Beltway in DC. This is a subject that the US Military is clear on but the rest of the talking heads within the halls of Government are still kinda clueless on.....Especially those who talk about the subject when their only goal is re-election, not doing what is needed.

YES, we are fighting Al Qeada but we are also fighting the TALIBAN, Haqqani, and a whole collection of unaligned narco-terrorists who are roaming around on either side of the AF/PAK border...These evil bastards don't care about what we do, they want to keep control and terrorize the populace in Afghanistan & Pakistan. They want to inflict as much damage as possible (For example, see the Intercontinental Hotel raid on Tuesday) and try to wear down the support of the homefront as in that fashion, they win. We go home, they take over all over again.

These are the same heartless and souless bastards who hung a 7 year old child in AFGHN as a spy last July. They will kill anyone, at any time to further there own vile cause.

I feel about the same way as USMC General James Mattis - " You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil. You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them. Actually it's quite fun to fight them, you know. It's a hell of a hoot." - Roger that sir.

Just for clarification, the enclosed illustration paints 1000 words. I'm sorry Mr. & Mrs. America. I know you are tired of us being here in Afghanistan but these souless bastards are the 21st century version of the Nazis. We must elminate them as they will not stop doing what they do. Their goal is to inflict their twisted version of "reality" upon the entire Western World.

PAKISTAN, a.k.a. Jihadistan - An overview of one of the most unstable countries in the world and our partner in the fight against Terror

Like many, I was not shocked when OBL, USA Enemy #1 was found in Pakistan. Even the most uninformed news hound would have deduced that he was hiding there. The US tracked his where abouts and then sent in the best, The US Navy SEALs.

Now, after killing the Leader of Al Qeada, what is the staus for Pakistan? The calls for reduction of military aid until we have a more creditable idea of what the situation is in Pakistan are gaining grip. The US taxpayer is getting very little our ROI if OBL could be on the ground in Pakistan without the ISI knowing. The excuses Pakistan provides are weak at best.

Foreignpolicy.com has provided a good overview on this unstable neighbor to Afghanistan. The world and the US may have larger issues unless we can solve not just what is occurring on the AFGHN side of the border but the PAK side of the border also. Things are not good in this area of the world.


Taliban Presence in Pakistan

Below is the best map we have found about the status of the Taliban presence today. It was based on a thorough and labor-intensive analysis by BBC's Urdu service.



Jihadistan
BY PETER BERGEN AND KATHERINE TIEDEMANN - Foreignpolicy.com

Introduction

Pakistan is the headquarters of both al Qaeda and the Taliban, while Pakistani nuclear scientists have met with Osama bin Laden and proliferated nuclear technology to rogues states such as North Korea. Few countries in the world worry the Obama administration more. In past months the Taliban have moved deep into Pakistan, at one point taking up positions just 60 miles from the capital, Islamabad. The Pakistani military is pushing back with aggressive military operations in the Swat Valley, which the government effectively ceded to Taliban control earlier this year. The fighting has displaced more than 2 million Pakistanis.

Just how stable is this nuclear-armed state? Where are Pakistan's nukes, and how large is the country's nuclear program? Just how strong are Pakistan's militants? And how has the United States or the Pakistani state dealt with them either through military action or peace agreements? These are some of the questions we hope to try to answer in these graphics.

Nuclear Weapons

As the violence rises in Pakistan, Americans are increasingly worried about the safety of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal; 87 percent in a poll this year said this issue concerned them. The locations of Pakistan's dozen or so nuclear facilities are largely a secret, but what is known is that one of the main nuclear research facilities is in Kahuta, outside Islamabad. This is where uranium is enriched via gas centrifuges. The district of Khushab, in Punjab province, is home to two plutonium production reactors, which may have eclipsed the uranium enrichment at Kahuta as Pakistan's primary source of fissile material.

One key fact: Pakistan has the fastest-growing nuclear weapons program in the world.

Jihadi Violence

Jihadi violence has grown exponentially in Pakistan over the last several years. Insurgent attacks have increased more than 700 percent since 2005, and suicide attacks have increased 20-fold. Suicide bombers managed, for instance, to strike in three places in Pakistan in just one 24-hour period in April.

The number of Pakistanis who say their country is heading in the wrong direction has tracked closely with the accelerating trend of jihadi violence.


Suicide Attack Locations

One way to map the spread of violence in Pakistan is by tracking the locations of suicide attacks. By analyzing reliable media reports and data from the Pak Institute for Peace Studies in Islamabad,

The trend is clear: From only six suicide attacks in Pakistan in 2004 to 63 in 2008, terrorist violence has risen exponentially. Click the highlighted areas for more details about each attack.
Predator Strikes and al Qaeda

Just three days into his presidency, Obama authorized a near-simultaneous pair of drone strikes against targets in North and South Waziristan. Between when he took office and August 7, there have been 28 strikes, roughly one per week. Our analysis shows that these attacks have killed some 350 people, with the August 5 attack killing Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud. Only one other strike has killed another important al Qaeda or Taliban leader, presumably because many of them have decamped from the tribal areas following the 34 drone attacks there last year which killed at least 10 militant leaders. Today the drone program seems to have hit the point of diminishing returns.

The drone strikes have certainly put pressure on al Qaeda. In 2008, the terrorist group released less than half the number of audio- and videotapes that it did the year before. An organization which is concentrating on survival has little time to put out communiqués. This year al Qaeda is cranking out a relatively higher volume of tapes than it did last year, but still far less than it did at its peak in 2007.

Hearts and Minds

Since 2007, both Osama bin Laden and the Taliban have been losing some popularity in Pakistan, a drop that coincides with the dramatic increases in terrorist attacks there. But this has not translated into more support for the United States; fewer than one in four Pakistani respondents have a favorable view of America. And when asked to name the principal threat to their security, more than half chose the United States, while only 8 percent said al Qaeda.

Pakistani Efforts to Stop the Violence

Military: Examples of Fighting Between Militants and Pakistani Security Forces

March to April 2009. Taliban militants began to impose sharia law in the Swat Valley as part of the conditions of the Malakand Accord, but their incursion into Buner sparked a more robust Pakistani military response than in the past. The fighting continues today between some 4,000 militants and 15,000 soldiers.

November 2007. Extremists loyal to Maulana Fazlullah, Taliban leader in Swat, seized territory in the Swat Valley and attempted to impose sharia law over the region. The Pakistani Army responded by sending a force of 20,000 soldiers to counter the radical cleric, and several weeks of fighting followed. By early December, the military claimed to have driven all the militants out, killing nearly 300 and capturing 140. The rest of Fazlullah's estimated 5,000 fighters melt back into the population.

July 2007. The Red Mosque siege in Islamabad, a violent confrontation between militants campaigning for the imposition of sharia law and Pakistani security forces, left at least 87 people dead, including militant cleric leader Abdur Rashid Ghazi and 11 members of the Pakistani special forces. Although the Pakistani military pushed the militants out of the mosque after a week of fighting, suicide attacks drastically ratcheted up following the conflict; between January and June, there were 11, but between July and December there were 49.

March 2004. Heavy fighting between 500 Taliban militants and some 5,000 Pakistani soldiers broke out near Wana, South Waziristan. More than 100 militants and soldiers died in the conflict, which ended after nearly a week of back-and-forth hostilities. The next month, the Pakistani Army signed a peace agreement with the militants, viewed as a concession to the extremists.

Pakistan Army Deployments

2009
There are 555,000 military personnel, of whom 360,000 are near the border with India.
As of May 10, President Asif Ali Zardari said 125,000 troops are on the border with Afghanistan. In April, the Pakistani military moved 6,000 troops from the border with India (that were moved there after the 2008 Mumbai attacks perpetrated by Pakistani militants).

More than 1,500 Pakistani soldiers have been killed fighting the militants since 2001.
In the past several months, Pakistan has moved 15,000 soldiers into the area around Swat and Buner following the collapse of the February peace agreement with the Taliban.

2008
On Dec. 28, following the November 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks, which heighted tensions between India and Pakistan, the Pakistan Army moved 20,000 troops from the Afghan border to the Indian border.

2006
Some 80,000 soldiers on the border with Afghanistan engaged with militants.

2003
Some 70,000 troops were in tribal regions along Afghan border.

December 2001
The Pakistani Army sent the first of 6,000 soldiers to the Afghan border, an area where it previously had no presence.

Diplomatic: 'Peace' Agreements

For the past five years, the Pakistani military and/or government has signed a number of "peace" deals with the Taliban. Generally these deals have been ratifications of military failure, and in any event, every deal has brought further Taliban advances, suggesting that appeasing the Taliban is invariably counterproductive.

--February 2009. Swat Valley truce, known as the Malakand Accord.
--September 2006. North Waziristan truce between Pakistani government and Taliban; after the truce, Pakistan's Army pulled back "tens of thousands of troops."
--February 2005. Sararogha peace agreement with the Pakistani Army and the Taliban and (Baitullah) Mehsud tribes.
--April 2004. Shakai peace agreement between South Waziristan militants and Pakistani Army.

The man behind the raid to get OBL - His requirements for mission success were " surprise, speed, security, simplicity, purpose and repetition."

Pride in our military has been riding high since the killing of OBL and was at a pretty high level for the past two decades....it is well deserved as we have the finest military in the history of the world.

Anyone who has served in the US Navy can take pride that a team of NAVY SEALS took out the "head cockroach" of Al Qeada. The US NAVY SEALS are the best of the best...

Here is a profile of the man who devised the raid and pulled together the teams who made it happen...BRAVO ZULU to all who shared in this success as it was a true team effort.


Adm. William McRaven: The terrorist hunter on whose shoulders Osama bin Laden raid rested
By Craig Whitlock, Washington Post

As U.S. helicopters secretly entered Pakistani airspace Sunday, the Joint Operations Center at Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan was under the control of a square-jawed admiral from Texas who had labored for years to find Osama bin Laden’s elusive trail.

Vice Adm. William H. McRaven, one of the most experienced terrorist hunters in the U.S. government, had tapped a special unit of Navy SEALs for the mission two months earlier. A former SEAL himself, McRaven had overseen weeks of intensive training for a covert operation that could cripple al-Qaeda if it worked, or strain an already troubled alliance with Pakistan if it went awry.

The search for bin Laden was led by the CIA, which painstakingly pieced together scraps of intelligence that eventually pointed to a high-walled compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. But when President Obama gave the authorization to invade the site, CIA Director Leon Panetta delegated the raid to McRaven, who had been preparing for such a moment for most of his career.

He has worked almost exclusively on counterterrorism operations and strategy since 2001, when as a Navy captain he was assigned to the White House shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks. The author of a textbook titled “Spec Ops,” McRaven had long emphasized six key requirements for any successful mission: surprise, speed, security, simplicity, purpose and repetition.

For the especially risky bin Laden operation, he insisted on another: precision.

“He understands the strategic importance of precision,” said a senior Obama administration official who worked closely with McRaven to find bin Laden, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the operation. “He demands high standards. That’s why we’ve been so successful.”

As leader of the military’s highly secretive Joint Special Operations Command, McRaven has overseen a rapid escalation of manhunts for Taliban leaders in Afghanistan and al-Qaeda figures around the world. Although he’s a three-star admiral, the muscular 55-year-old still sometimes accompanies his teams on snatch-and-grab missions.

On Friday, McRaven received the green light from Panetta to launch the raid at the earliest opportunity. Later that day, he met with a six-member congressional delegation that was coincidentally visiting Afghanistan. He gave the lawmakers a tour of the Bagram operations center that — unbeknownst to them — was gearing up for the critical mission.

“Little did we know he had already given the order to take out Osama bin Laden,” said Rep. Bill Shuster (R-Pa.), who led the delegation.

McRaven had been just weeks away from leaving Afghanistan for a new assignment. He had led the Joint Special Operations Command since 2008, when he succeeded Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, whose team helped turn the tide of the war in Iraq by relentlessly targeting insurgent leaders, including al-Qaeda’s chief in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Zarqawi was killed by a U.S. airstrike in 2006.

“Nobody thought it would be possible, frankly, to take that command beyond what Stan McChrystal did, but he has,” said Michael G. Vickers, undersecretary of defense for intelligence. “He has taken what was already a very integrated, interagency organization and taken it to another level.”

Vickers has known McRaven since he was a Navy SEAL lieutenant commander and Vickers an Army Special Forces captain. They’ve worked especially closely over the past four years, when Vickers served as the Pentagon’s top civilian official overseeing Special Operations forces, including units hunting al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders.

“Bill is a great leader but also a pretty big thinker,” Vickers said. “It’s a rare balance of these two skills.”

McRaven returned to Washington after bin Laden’s death and briefed lawmakers in a closed session Wednesday on Capitol Hill. He declined to be interviewed for this article.

He grew up as the son of an Air Force colonel who flew British Spitfires during World War II and played briefly in the NFL. McRaven graduated from the University of Texas at Austin, where he studied journalism, in 1977. His 1995 book analyzed eight famous moments in special-operations history, including the Israeli raid to free hostages on a hijacked airliner at Entebbe, Uganda.

Unlike some high-ranking military officers, McRaven is “definitely not a yeller-screamer,” said a former Special Operations official who has known him for years and spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the clandestine nature of their work. “He’s a guy that I think you can look at as a modern-day SEAL, a post-Vietnam-era SEAL — guys that are quiet, humble, smart.”

Under his leadership, the Joint Special Operations Command has expanded its reach beyond Afghanistan and Iraq. In September 2009, McRaven negotiated an agreement with Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh to conduct secret missions with Yemeni troops against al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, an affiliate of bin Laden’s network that some officials say has become the primary terrorist threat to the United States.

But McRaven has spent most of his time in Afghanistan, where JSOC efforts have greatly intensified. His forces have killed or captured hundreds of insurgent leaders over the past year, primarily in nighttime raids, according to U.S. military officials.

They have portrayed the raids as a cornerstone of their war strategy. Although they acknowledge that such raids alone cannot defeat the Taliban, “the results have been staggering,” said the senior Obama administration official.

But the nighttime operations have strained relations with the Afghan government, which says that the raids often target the wrong individuals and that U.S. forces are not held accountable for lethal mistakes.

In October, Special Operations forces accidentally killed a kidnapped British aid worker with a grenade during a botched mission. U.S. officials at first blamed the death on the Taliban but were forced to retract the assertion.

Also last year, after Special Operations forces killed five innocent Afghan civilians in another bungled raid, McRaven admitted that his team had committed “a terrible mistake” and visited the victims’ relatives to ask for forgiveness.

Paying homage to tribal honor codes, McRaven took two sheep to the village in Paktia province and offered to sacrifice them in a mercy-seeking gesture. Village elders spared the sheep but did accept a cash payment of about $30,000, according to an eyewitness account reported by the Times of London.

“I am a soldier,” McRaven told the father of two of the victims. “I have spent most of my career overseas, away from my family, but I have children as well, and my heart grieves for you.”

In an attempt to minimize further casualties, McRaven ordered the reinstallation of bright-white spotlights on AC-130 gunships that often accompany assault forces on the nighttime raids. Military officials describe the lights as an intimidating factor that encourages insurgents to give up, or at least not to flee and grab a weapon.

In March, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said he was recommending McRaven for promotion to four-star admiral and leader of the U.S. Special Operations Command, based in Tampa.

The move is subject to Senate approval. But Shuster, the congressman, said that given McRaven’s role in bin Laden’s capture, “they won’t be able to confirm him quickly enough.”


Staff writers Greg Miller, Dana Priest and Karen Tumulty and staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report

Afghanistan, Pakistan and the complex issues that influence how long we will remain in Afghanistan

The author of this write up makes some very valid points....as I have stated before, we are not in Afghanistan fighting Al Qeada (although they do figure into the mix), we are here to maintain the ability of the Afghan people to defend themselves from the Taliban. The area where the Taliban (who are no more than well armed narco-terrorists) hide is in Pakistan.....

No easy answers to the questions but ones we need to review seriously....The cost of national blood and treasure dictates we come up with a reasonable solution sooner rather than later.....


Is U.S. role in Afghan war obsolete?
Washington (CNN) -- The killing of Osama bin Laden raises many haunting questions. Here's the most important:

Has our mission in Afghanistan become obsolete?

To think through that question, start with a prior question: Why did we remain in Afghanistan after the overthrow of the Taliban?

The usual answer to that question is: To prevent Afghanistan from re-emerging as a terrorist safe haven.

There have always been a lot of problems with that answer. (For example: Does it really take 100,000 U.S. troops, plus allies, to prevent a country from becoming a terrorist safe haven? We're doing a pretty good job in Yemen with a radically smaller presence.)

But this week, we have exposed to sight two huge problems with the usual answer.

1. The world's most important terrorist safe haven is visibly not Afghanistan, but instead next-door Pakistan.

2. Because the U.S. presence in Afghanistan requires cooperation from Pakistan, the Afghanistan mission perversely inhibits the United States from taking more decisive action against Pakistan's harboring of terrorism.

Here's a very concrete example. Through the 2008 presidential campaign, candidates John McCain and Barack Obama tussled over the issue of direct anti-terrorist action inside Pakistan. On February 20, 2008, McCain called Obama "naive" for suggesting that he might act inside Pakistan without Pakistani permission.

In retrospect, McCain's answer looks wrong. But think about why McCain said what he did. He knew that acting in a way that offended Pakistan would complicate the mission in Afghanistan. The United States looks to Pakistan to police the Pashtun country on the other side of the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. Guerrilla wars become much harder to win if the guerrillas are allowed sanctuary across an international border. So if the mission in Afghanistan is the supreme priority, then acting in ways that offend Pakistan must be avoided.

But this thinking leads to an upside-down result: In order to prevent Afghanistan from ever again harboring a potential future bin Laden, we have to indulge Pakistan as it harbors the actual bin Laden!

Some Democrats have retrospectively seized on McCain's upside-down logic as proof that candidate Obama was "right" in 2008....

But, of course, President Obama has made decisions that have aggravated the upside-down problem. By inserting so many additional U.S. forces into Afghanistan, he has made the United States more dependent than ever on Pakistan -- with the result that even after finding and killing Osama bin Laden in the heart of Pakistan's national security establishment, the Obama administration is reluctant to challenge Pakistan publicly or even privately.

Think now: What would our policy in South Asia look like if we had a much smaller mission in Afghanistan? Perhaps 20,000 U.S. and allied troops on a security assistance mission rather than 100,000-plus on a combat mission?

By emancipating itself from dependence on Pakistan, the United States would gain scope to focus on the most vital questions in the U.S.-Pakistan relationship, such as:

• How confident do we feel that the people who sheltered bin Laden do not also control Pakistan's nuclear force?

• If we do not have confidence in the people who control Pakistan's nuclear force, what plans do we have to disable that nuclear force?

• Why wasn't Pakistani nuclear scientist A.Q. Khan, the Johnny Appleseed of nuclear proliferation, delivered to U.S. custody?

• Pakistan has a long history of not only harboring anti-U.S. terrorism, but actively promoting and supporting terrorism against India. Why is Pakistan not listed alongside Iran as a state sponsor of terror?

• Why is Pakistan receiving U.S. military aid?

• Why does Pakistan have the benefit of a trade and investment agreement with the United States?

Instead, even now -- even now! -- we're told that Pakistan is just too important to permit the U.S. to act on its stated doctrine--articulated by George W. Bush's administration and not repudiated by Obama's: "Those who harbor terrorists will be treated as terrorists themselves." So long as we remain in Afghanistan, that statement remains true. The question is, shouldn't we be taking now the steps to render the statement less true?

The less committed we are to Afghanistan, the more independent we are of Pakistan. The more independent we are of Pakistan, the more leverage we have over Pakistan. The more leverage we have over Pakistan, the more clout we have to shut down Pakistan's long, vicious, and now not credibly deniable state support for terrorism.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of David Frum.

" What distinguishes SEALs is that they can be thoughtful, disciplined and proportional in the use of force..."

I cannot fully express in the written word how much PRIDE swelled through me earlier this week when I heard that one of our US NAVY SEALS was able to take out Bin Laden.....WOW - what an awesome accomplishment and a great kudo for the US NAVY and our most elite warriors.

The US NAVY SEALS are the best, hands down. We have other elite forces and I salute all as this was a team effort - JSOC, DELTAS, RANGERS, etc. - they all have my thanks and gratitude.

In the final review, somewhere out there is a US Navy SEAL who if he ever identifies himself, will not be able to buy a beer EVER....I hope he writes a book and let's the world know after he retires......

GOD BLESS these Warriors......I stand humbled and in AWE of my Navy Brethern.


The SEAL Sensibility
From a member of the elite force, an inside look at the brutal training and secret work of the commandos who got Osama bin Laden.
By ERIC GREITENS - Wall Street Journal

At Camp Pendleton in California, where I did my initial weapons training, we must have fired thousands of rounds at practice-range targets printed with the likeness of Osama bin Laden. To take the real shot, the one that brought down bin Laden, was the dream of every Navy SEAL.

The man who got that chance in Pakistan last weekend was a member of the SEAL community's most elite unit. He and the others who descended on bin Laden's lair would have put in relentless practice for weeks beforehand—assaulting mock compounds, discussing contingencies and planning every detail of the operation. Most of the men on that mission had dedicated the past decade of their lives to this fight, and they—and their families—had made great personal sacrifices.

Turning on my cellphone last Sunday, I got a text message with the incredible news: "OBL is dead. Hoo Yah!" Within minutes, a tidal wave of messages followed from fellow Navy SEALs and other military and nonmilitary friends. My own thoughts went back to James Suh and Matt Axelson ("Axe"), two members of my own SEAL training class. When Axe was pinned down by the Taliban in a firefight in Afghanistan in June 2005, Suh boarded a helicopter to fly in for a rescue mission. The helicopter was shot down that day and both men died. I thought to myself: Axe, Suh, they got him.

The men who conducted the assault on bin Laden's compound are part of a proud tradition of service that traces its roots back to the Underwater Demolition Teams that cleared the beaches at Normandy. The SEAL teams themselves were born on Jan. 1, 1962, when President John F. Kennedy commissioned a new force of elite commandos that could operate from the sea, air and land (hence the acronym, SEALs). Though SEALs remain the nation's elite maritime special operations force, part of what Kennedy wanted and needed from them—and what the nation still asks of SEALs—is that they be a flexible force, capable of operating in any environment.

To be able to undertake such missions, SEALs undergo intense training and practice. As some of my SEAL instructors would say, "The more you sweat in training, the less you bleed in war."

It's impossible to account for everything that can go wrong on an operation, but professional warriors aim to leave nothing to chance—the slightest details are accounted for beforehand, from who will be the first to "fast rope" down from the helicopter to how the compound will be swept for computers and papers that might yield intelligence. Targets vary, but the objective of the planning is always the same: accomplish the mission and bring everyone home alive.

The rigors that SEALs go through begin on the day they walk into Basic Underwater Demolition/SEAL training in Coronado, Calif., universally recognized as the hardest military training in the world. BUD/S lasts a grueling six months. The classes include large contingents of high-school and college track and football stars, national-champion swimmers, and top-ranked wrestlers and boxers, but only 10% to 20% of the men who begin BUD/S usually manage to finish. About 250 graduate from training every year.

Though often physical in nature, the tests of SEAL training are also designed to push men to their mental and emotional limits. "Drown-proofing" is one of the most famous of these ordeals. I remember it well from my own training in 2001. Standing with five other men next to the ledge of the combat training tank, I put my hands behind my back while my swim buddy tied them together.

"How's that?"

"Feels good."

He tugged at the knot to check it a final time. A knot that came undone meant automatic failure. The five of us exchanged glances and then, with our hands and feet firmly bound, jumped into the pool for a 50-meter swim. SEAL candidates are also tested with two-mile ocean swims, four-mile timed runs in soft sand, and runs through the mountains wearing 40-pound rucksacks.

The pinnacle of SEAL training is known as Hell Week, a period of continuous tests and drills during which most classes sleep only a total of two to five hours. Every man has a different story of Hell Week; he remembers particular classmates and instructors, his own most difficult moments. But every Hell Week story is also the same: A man enters a new world aiming to become something greater, and having subjected himself to the hardest tests of his life, he has either passed or failed.

My Hell Week began in the middle of the night. Sleeping in a large tent with my men, I woke to the sound of a Mark-43 Squad Automatic Weapon. The Mark-43 has a cyclic rate of fire of 550 rounds per minute. It is the primary "heavy" gun carried by SEALs on patrol. A blank round is not nearly as loud as a live one, but when the gun is rocking just feet away from your ears in an enclosed tent, it still sounds painfully loud.

We soon started surf torture. We ran into the ocean until we were chest deep in water, formed a line, and linked arms as the cold waves ran through us. Soon we began to shiver. Instructors on bullhorns spoke evenly, "Gentlemen, quit now, and you can avoid the rush later. You are only at the beginning of a very long week. It just gets colder. It just gets harder."

"Let's go. Out of the water!" We ran out through waist-deep water, and as we hit the beach a whistle blew: whistle drills. One blast of the whistle and we dropped to the sand. Two blasts and we began to crawl to the sound of the whistle. We crawled through the sand, still shaking from the cold, until our bodies had warmed just past the edge of hypothermia. Then, "Back in the ocean! Hit the surf!"

We fought our way through that night and through the next day. As the sunlight weakened at the beginning of the next night, the instructors ran us out to the beach. We stood there in a line, and as we watched the sun drift down, they came out on their bullhorns: "Say goodnight to the sun, gentlemen. And you men have many, many more nights to go."

When they really wanted to torture us, they'd say, "Anybody who quits right now gets hot coffee and doughnuts. Come on, who wants a doughnut? Who wants a little coffee?"

Out of the corner of my eye, I saw men running for the bell. First two men ran, and then two more, and then another. The instructors had carried the bell out with us to the beach. To quit, you rang the bell three times. I could hear it: Ding, ding, ding. Ding, ding, ding. Ding, ding, ding.

A pack of men quit together. Weeks earlier, we had started our indoctrination phase with over 220 students. Only 21 originals from Class 237 would ultimately graduate. I believe that we had more men quit at that moment than at any other time in all of BUD/S training.

What kind of man makes it through Hell Week? That's hard to say. But I do know—generally—who won't make it. There are a dozen types that fail: the weight-lifting meatheads who think that the size of their biceps is an indication of their strength, the kids covered in tattoos announcing to the world how tough they are, the preening leaders who don't want to get dirty, and the look-at-me former athletes who have always been told they are stars but have never have been pushed beyond the envelope of their talent to the core of their character. In short, those who fail are the ones who focus on show. The vicious beauty of Hell Week is that you either survive or fail, you endure or you quit, you do—or you do not.

Some men who seemed impossibly weak at the beginning of SEAL training—men who puked on runs and had trouble with pull-ups—made it. Some men who were skinny and short and whose teeth chattered just looking at the ocean also made it. Some men who were visibly afraid, sometimes to the point of shaking, made it too.

Almost all the men who survived possessed one common quality. Even in great pain, faced with the test of their lives, they had the ability to step outside of their own pain, put aside their own fear and ask: How can I help the guy next to me? They had more than the "fist" of courage and physical strength. They also had a heart large enough to think about others, to dedicate themselves to a higher purpose.

SEALs are capable of great violence, but that's not what makes them truly special. Given two weeks of training and a bunch of rifles, any reasonably fit group of 16 athletes (the size of a SEAL platoon) can be trained to do harm. What distinguishes SEALs is that they can be thoughtful, disciplined and proportional in the use of force.

Years later, in early 2007, serving in Fallujah as the commander of a unit targeting al Qaeda's operations in Iraq, my SEAL training served me well. In combat outposts throughout Fallujah, what had once been medium-sized houses were now ringed with sandbags, earthen barriers and barbed wire. Groups of Marines, Iraqi soldiers and intelligence professionals from the military and other government agencies gathered there to plan and launch operations.

The squads, such as the Navy SEALs force that stormed Osama bin Laden's compound, have been been increasingly used in Afghanistan. (Photo by John Moore/Getty Images)
Though the specific tactics, techniques and procedures used for these operations remain classified, I can say that the fusion of operations and intelligence was a key development, allowing commandos to act swiftly on new information. When raids were conducted and men returned with computers or financial records, or even sometimes with the terrorists' pocket litter and scrawled notes, the intelligence professionals would set to work immediately. Often, by the time the commandos woke up, they had a new set of targets to hit the following night.

I remember sitting with Marines who had (cautiously) shared small pieces of intelligence with our Iraqi counterparts, who had (cautiously) shared information with us. Slowly, piece fit into piece, and like a family sitting down to snap together a jigsaw puzzle at Christmas, a picture emerged of the habits and acquaintances of an al Qaeda sniper who was suspected of being responsible for the death of several Marines in Fallujah. The target wasn't a senior man in the al Qaeda hierarchy. In fact, he seemed to be a runt, but sometimes the men who seemed like runts ended up having surprising connections to other terrorists.

The Death of bin Laden

Obama Tells Troops: 'Strategy Is Working' Debate Rages Over Fate of bin Laden Compound Spies Piece Together al Qaeda Playbook Irshad Manji: Islam Needs Reformists, Not 'Moderates' Over time, our picture of the al Qaeda network grew more complete. More and more terrorists were revealed, and the targets became so numerous that other forces had to be recruited to take them down. I had once imagined—probably based on watching bad movies about cops battling the mafia—that somewhere we would find a hierarchical chart of al Qaeda with bin Laden sitting at the top and pictures of men like this sniper near the bottom of a pyramid. In fact, no such clear picture existed, and every piece of new information seemed to offer a different way of interpreting what we thought we knew.

But throughout Iraq, night after night, we launched raids from the air, over land and yes—given the country's rivers—even sometimes from the water. Over time, the constant pressure degraded and destroyed al Qaeda's ability to operate. The terrorists knew that if they stayed in one place for long, they might be surprised in their sleep and find themselves being handcuffed by "men with green faces," as they sometimes called our commandos, whose faces, backlit by their night-vision goggles, seemed to glow green with menace in the middle of the night.

Members of al Qaeda in Iraq came to expect that they might wake up one night to the whomp of a helicopter overhead, the rattle of a Humvee outside, the explosion of their front door. These were the rude sounds of justice tracking them down, and Osama bin Laden no doubt heard them as well.

—Lt. Cmdr. Greitens is a SEAL in the U.S. Navy Reserve and the author of "The Heart and the Fist: The Education of a Humanitarian, the Making of a Navy SEAL."

US Keeps Up Pressure on Terrorists along the AF/PAK Border with Drone Strikes....Awesome use of the technology Dude !!

Looks like the US Military intends to keep the heat on for those feckless idiots who think they can hide out in the shite-wilds of the AF/PAK border.....Guess what? Just Like BIN LADEN, we will hunt you down and take you out.

Reminds me of the scene in the movie TOMBSTONE where Kurt Russell tells the outlaws who try to kill him & his family, " I see a man wearing a red sash, I kill him.....You tell them, I'm coming AND HELL'S COMING WITH ME ...You got that, HELL'S COMING WITH ME !!!"

Yup, Here's my heads up to the terrorist idiots out there who think they can hide in the hovels out there in the AF/PAK border region - We're coming for YOU and HELL's coming with us, on the wings of a Predator....

US Drone Strike Kills 15 Militants, Says Pakistan
Phillip Ittner Islamabad May 06, 2011
VOA News

Pakistani intelligence officials say a U.S. missile attack close to the Afghan border has killed at least 15 people.

Friday's drone attack was the first reported strike since Monday's pre-dawn U.S. commando raid that killed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.

Authorities say the attack targeted a compound in North Waziristan, a stronghold of Taliban and al-Qaida militants on the border with Afghanistan.

U.S. drone strikes against militants based in Pakistan's tribal belt have been a source of friction between the two countries and Friday's strike could further inflame tensions between Islamabad and Washington.

Anti-US protests

And, with anti-U.S. protests taking across the country on Friday, security has been tightened further to quell any potential violence. Several Islamist groups demonstrated Friday against bin Laden's killing, saying more figures like him would arise to wage holy war against the United States.

Speaking to journalists outside the parliament building Friday, Chaudry Nisar, the head of the opposition in Pakistan's national assembly, called on the government to clarify outstanding questions about Osama Bin Laden and the U.S. raid that led to his death.

Nisar says the nation's honor has been trampled by the U.S. raid, and he says and for the government to conduct business as usual is not acceptable. He says someone must be found responsible and heads must roll.

Unpopular drones

U.S. drone strikes are extremely unpopular in Pakistan because of the perception of high civilian deaths from the missile attacks which are targeted militants along the Afghan border. Many Pakistani's feel strongly they are a violation of the country's sovereignty.

The Pakistani government said bin Laden's death was a milestone in the fight against militancy although it expressed objections to the raid which killed him as a violation of its sovereignty.

Mounting criticism

Since the covert mission, there has been widespread criticism in Pakistan about how the government has released information on the raid, and about the presence of Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil. Many Pakistani's say the raid also exposed weaknesses in the country's defense, something Foreign Secretary Salman Bashir denied on Thursday.

"There is no reason for Pakistanis to feel demoralized," he said. "We are proud of our achievements. We are proud of our defense capabilities. We are proud of our armed forces. We are proud of our track record in anti-terror, which is equal to none. And I think we have to look to the future and not be mired in the past," Bashir said.

Pakistan has denied any knowledge of the al-Qaida leader's whereabouts. On Thursday the army threatened to cut intelligence and military cooperation with the United States if it mounted more attacks on Pakistani soil.

Whacky - Pakis slams ‘unauthorized’ US raid on bin Laden.....REALLY ?? REALLY PAKISTAN???

“From some quarters, there is anger at the United States conducting a mission inside Pakistan.”

REALLY ? Really Pakistan ?? You are lucky we just don’t decide to send MORE missions into your country......like what would you do to stop us ?? Have some more angry demonstrations in Islamabad ? It would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

Let's load up the drones and turn the Whacki-Pakis on to the REAL potential for what can happen when you piss us off. The bases in Afghanistan are starting to show their full potential to take on these idiots in Pakistan who were likely assisting in hiding OBL.

Get over yourself before we re-think the $4 Billion in aid we provide you and any other form of assistance.

BRAVO ZULU to the US NAVY SEALS - Beers on me next time I see any of my Navy Seal Brothers.


Pakistan slams ‘unauthorized’ US raid on bin Laden

By Associated Press Tuesday, May 3, 2011
http://www.bostonherald.com Asia Pacific

ABBOTTABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan criticized the American raid that killed Osama bin Laden as an "unauthorized unilateral action," laying bare the strains the operation has put on an already rocky alliance.

U.S. legislators along with the leaders of Britain and France questioned how the Pakistani government could not have known the al-Qaida leader was living in a garrison town less than a two-hour drive from the capital and had apparently lived there for years.

"I find it hard to believe that the presence of a person or individual such as bin Laden in a large compound in a relatively small town ... could go completely unnoticed," French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe told reporters in Paris.

British Prime Minister David Cameron also demanded that Pakistani leaders explain how bin Laden had lived undetected in Abbottabad. But in a nod to the complexities of dealing with a nuclear-armed, unstable country that is crucial to success in the war in Afghanistan, Cameron said having "a massive row" with Islamabad over the issue would not be in Britain’s interest.

White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters Tuesday that the U.S. is committed to cooperating with Pakistan.

"We don’t know who if anybody in the government was aware that bin Laden or a high-value target was living in the compound. It’s logical to assume he had a supporting network. What constituted that network remains to be seen," Carney said.

"It’s a big country and a big government and we have to be very focused and careful about how we do this because it is an important relationship."

A day after U.S. commandos killed the al-Qaida leader following a 10-year manhunt, new details emerged today from Pakistan’s powerful intelligence agency and bin Laden’s neighbors in Abbottabad.

Residents said they sensed something was odd about the walled three-story house, even though bin Laden and his family rarely ventured outside and most neighbors were not aware that foreigners were living there.

"That house was obviously a suspicious one," said Jahangir Khan, who was buying a newspaper in Abbottabad. "Either it was a complete failure of our intelligence agencies or they were involved in this affair."

Neighbors said two men would routinely emerge from the compound to run errands or occasionally attend a neighborhood gathering, such as a funeral. Both men were tall, fair skinned and bearded.

"People were skeptical in this neighborhood about this place and these guys," said Mashood Khan, a 45-year-old farmer. "They used to gossip, say they were smugglers or drug dealers. People would complain that even with such a big house they didn’t invite the poor or distribute charity."

U.S. officials have suggested Pakistani officials may have known where bin Laden was living and members of Congress have seized on those suspicions to call for the U.S. to consider cutting billions of aid to Pakistan if it turns out to be true.

Western officials have long regarded Pakistani security forces with suspicion, especially when it comes to links with militants fighting in Afghanistan. Last year, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton publicly said she suspected that some members of Pakistan’s government knew where bin Laden was hiding.

However, within Pakistan criticism has been focused on the U.S. breaching the country’s sovereignty. The Obama administration has said it did not inform the Pakistanis in advance of the operation against bin Laden, for fear they would tip off the targets.

A strongly worded Pakistani government statement warned the U.S. not to launch similar operations in the future. It rejected suggestions that officials knew where bin Laden was.

Still, there were other revelations that pointed to prior knowledge that the compound was linked to al-Qaida.

Pakistani intelligence agencies hunting for a top al-Qaida operative raided the house in 2003, according to a senior officer, speaking on condition of anonymity in line with the spy agency’s policy.

The house was just being built at the time of the raid by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency, and Abu Faraj al-Libi, al-Qaida’s No. 3, was not there, said the officer.

U.S. officials have said al-Libi once lived in the house and that information from him played a role in tracking the al-Qaida chief down. Al-Libi was arrested by Pakistani police after a shootout in 2005 and he was later handed over to U.S. authorities.

The Pakistani officer said he didn’t know why bin Laden would choose a house that already had been compromised.

He also insisted the ISI would have captured bin Laden if it had known he was there, and pushed back at international criticism of the agency.

"Look at our track record given the issues we have faced, the lack of funds. We have killed or captured hundreds" of extremists), said the officer. "All of a sudden one failure makes us incompetent and 10 years of effort is overlooked."

Al-Qaida has been responsible for score of bloody attacks inside Pakistan, so on the face of it would seem strange for Islamabad to be sheltering bin Laden. Critics of Pakistan say that by keeping him on the run, Islamabad was ensuring that U.S. aid and weapons to the country kept flowing.

The Pakistani government said that since 2009 the ISI has shared information about the compound with the CIA and other Western intelligence agencies, and that intelligence indicating foreigners were in the Abbottabad area continued until mid-April.

In an essay published Tuesday by The Washington Post, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari denied suggestions his country’s security forces may have sheltered bin Laden, and said their cooperation with the United States helped pinpoint him.

The raid followed months of deteriorating relations between the CIA and Pakistan’s intelligence service. Those strains came to a head in late January after a CIA contractor shot and killed two Pakistanis in what Washington said was self-defense.

In a statement, the Pakistani government said "this event of unauthorized unilateral action cannot be taken as a rule."

"The government of Pakistan further affirms that such an event shall not serve as a future precedent for any state, including the U.S.," it said, calling such actions a "threat to international peace and security."

The statement may be partly motivated by domestic concerns. The government and army has come under criticism following the raid by those who have accused the government of allowing Washington to violate the country’s sovereignty. Islamabad has also been angered at the suspicions it had been sheltering bin Laden.

Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/international/asia_pacific/view.bg?articleid=1335247

US NAVY SEALS HIT THE TARGET - BIN LADEN IS DEAD

From Afghanistan, I congratulate the members of US NAVY SEAL TEAM SIX for taking out the number one target, BIN LADEN in his lair in Pakistan....The US Navy Seals are a force that no other country can match and they earned the thanks of a grateful nation today.....I was awaiting a ride from a FOB outside Kabul when the news broke and I was able to get a ride back to Bagram....Today is a red letter day!

I lost two very good friends due to the dead terrorist - A high school buddy who was on the 104th Floor of World Trade working at Cantor Fitzgerald on 09/11/01 and I lost a shipmate of mine on the USS Cole.

So we scratched one more terrorist, one of his sons and a few others who were with him at his hideout in Pakistan....Next we need to hold Pakistan responsible for hiding and providing safe harbor for this idiot who thought he could escape justice.

He's dead and I'm glad. Now onto ridding the free world of his cohorts....the sooner the better.

US NAVY SEAL TEAM SIX....YOU ROCK !!!!

Pakistani Taliban states, Punjab Governor Salman Taseer "was responsible for his own murder" because he had criticized the law against Blasphemy"

While we are fighting for the freedom of Afghanistan, across the border in Pakistan, things are getting worse. Much worse. Pakistan has been the growing concern for any one who sees that a country that controls their own Nuclear Arsenal is teetering on being overtaken by a Taliban Militants who are pressing the government on all sides.....This is not good especially in light of the BILLIONS in foreign aid that we provide Pakistan each year....

All I can say is if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is usually a duck. in the case of Pakistan, they are looking more and more like a country that we will find ourselves opposing instead of supporting as the Taliban Militants are slowly but surely gaining a greater control over all aspects of Pakistani politics. This is not good.

Thousands rally in Pakistan for blasphemy laws
By ASHRAF KHAN
The Associated Press

KARACHI, Pakistan -- Tens of thousands of demonstrators marched in Pakistan's largest city on Sunday to oppose any change to national blasphemy laws and to praise a man charged with murdering a provincial governor who had campaigned against the divisive legislation.

The rally of up to 50,000 people in downtown Karachi was one of the largest demonstrations of support for the laws, which make insulting Islam a capital offense. It was organized before the governor of Punjab province, Salman Taseer, was shot dead on Tuesday in Islamabad by a bodyguard who told a court he considered Taseer a blasphemer.

Muslim groups have praised the bodyguard, Mumtaz Qadri, and have used Taseer's death to warn others not to speak out against the much-derided laws.

The size of the Karachi rally, which was large even by the standards of the city of 16 million, showed how bitter the argument is over the decades-old laws.

Although courts typically overturn blasphemy convictions and no executions have been carried out, rights activists say the laws are used to settle rivalries and persecute religious minorities.

Amid the threats from groups defending the law, the prime minister ruled out any changes to the legislation on Sunday, even as one of his key Cabinet ministers promised reforms were still on the agenda.

"This huge rally today has categorically signaled that nobody could dare to amend the blasphemy law," said Fazlur Rehman, the key speaker at Sunday's demonstration and head of the Taliban-linked conservative religious party Jamiat Ulema Islam.

"If the rulers are out to defend Taseer, so we also have the right to legally defend Mumtaz Qadri," he told the crowd.

He said Taseer "was responsible for his own murder" because he had criticized the law.

The laws came under renewed international scrutiny late last year when a 45-year-old Christian woman, Asia Bibi, was sentenced to death for allegedly insulting Islam's prophet.

People accused of blasphemy are often killed by extremists or spend significant amounts of time behind bars. In some cases, the charges border on the ridiculous: A man was recently held because he threw away a business card of someone whose first name is Muhammad.

The Karachi rally represented all major Muslim groups and sects in Pakistan's most populous city and was one of the few to bring together moderate and conservative Muslims. Police officer Irshad Sehar estimated 40,000 to 50,000 people attended

Many marchers waved the flags of conservative and radical Islamist parties and chanted: "Courage and bravery, Qadri, Qadri."

Many wore head and arm bands inscribed: "We are ready to sacrifice our lives for the sanctity of the prophet."

Minister for Minorities Shahbaz Bhatti said such demonstrations would not deter the government from amending the laws, which he said were being abused by Muslim extremists to victimize minorities. He warned that religious leaders who preach violence could be charged with inciting murder if the debate claims another life.

"We will not be intimidated," Bhatti told The Associated Press. "We cannot remain silent on the victimization and growing extremism."

Bhatti, a member of Pakistan's Christian minority, did not give any timeframe for changing the laws and said details on how they might be amended had yet to be discussed with interest groups.

Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani, however, later told reporters in Islamabad that his government would not tamper with the contentious legislation.

"Government doesn't have any such intention," Gilani said in response to a question about whether his government is bringing any amendment to the laws. "I have also said it before categorically."

Bhatti joined a congregation of 100 Christian worshippers in a Roman Catholic church in Islamabad on Sunday for a memorial service for Taseer. He said Islamist political parties were seeking to use the debate over the law to divide and weaken the government and distract it from its battle with extremists.

"These parties were supportive of the Taliban and al-Qaida and now they want to divert the attention of the government away from the war against terrorism," he said.

During a visit to Islamabad on Saturday, German Foreign Minister Guide Westerwelle described Taseer's murder as "a terroristic act."

"It shows us that our common engagement is necessary to fight against every terroristic attack and we very much appreciate the effort Pakistan is undertaking in the fight against terrorists," Westerwelle told reporters.

Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi declined to tell AP whether he agreed with his counterpart's assessment.

"It's very sad what happened. The matter is being investigated ... and I would not like to comment on that at this stage," Qureshi told AP.

Associated Press writers Asif Shahzad and Rod McGuirk in Islamabad contributed to this report.

"Razzik can beat the Taliban." - A report regarding one of our "friends" at Spin Baldak on the AFPAK border

In the ultimate cinematic send up to the Vietnam War, Apocalypse Now, the writers captured the essence of the frustration that the military faced in trying to win a war in a country that had long since frustrated any outside army that stumbled in.... The futility of fighting in some places became apparent...it spawned statement such as this:

" They blow up the bridge every night and we rebuild it, so the Generals get to say that the road is open."

Things aren't quite that bad in AFGHN but we have come to the realization that not all the people we will work with operate with the same "westernized view" of the battle. That's why we have guys like Col. Abdul Razzik....

He has been assisting us with keeping things working at SPIN B (otherwise known as Spin Baldak) on the Pakistan border....one place I did not go when I was there and one I was not unhappy that I missed either.

In Afghanistan, U.S. Turns 'Malignant Actor' Into Ally .
By YAROSLAV TROFIMOV in Spin Boldak, Afghanistan, and MATTHEW ROSENBERG in Kabul
WSJ

American officials in Afghanistan used to call Col. Abdul Razzik a "malignant actor" who must be sidelined. Now they hail the suspected drug lord as a hero of the new Kandahar offensive and a leader with national potential.

Once seen as a 'malignant actor,' he has turned ally in the U.S. bid to clear Taliban strongholds.

Col. Razzik—an illiterate 34-year-old Afghan Border Police officer who calls himself General, wears flashy Swiss watches and controls southern Afghanistan's lucrative border crossing with Pakistan—emerged over the past two months as the coalition's top choice for clearing Taliban strongholds in Kandahar province, the campaign's centerpiece and the insurgents' heartland.

His reversal of fortune reflects a departure from U.S. counterinsurgency efforts to better governance, marginalize crime-tainted power brokers and win civilians' trust. Since U.S. Gen. David Petraeus took command of coalition forces in July, the military has focused more on killing as many Taliban as possible with the help of whatever local allies can be found, including strongmen whose abuses had made the Taliban popular in the first place.

U.S. officials say they are still broadly committed to the counterinsurgency principles but that targeting Taliban commanders comes first in areas where escalating violence makes governance efforts impossible.

"Now, the first priority is to beat the Taliban. Once this is done, we can shift our attention to these illicit actors," said U.S. Special Forces Lt. Col. James Hayes, who teamed up with Col. Razzik during recent clearing operations in Kandahar. "Razzik can beat the Taliban."

Col. Razzik and his force of some 250 men have become invaluable to the U.S.-led operations to seize Taliban redoubts in Kandahar province, U.S. commanders say. Unlike other Afghan security forces—often ineffectual, reluctant to fight or simply unfamiliar with Kandahar's terrain—his men have wowed American commanders with their tactical skills and determination.

"I have a clear strategy: When the enemies are killing us, we shouldn't be giving them flowers," Col. Razzik said in an interview, as he awaited a visit by the American ambassador to his fort-like base in the border town of Spin Boldak. "But maybe that's what others have been doing until now."

Col. Razzik's ability to safeguard the strategic Spin Boldak crossing from the Taliban in recent years has allowed him to stay in office. That job security comes despite what officials in Kabul and Washington say are well-founded concerns that he has been enriching himself and his patron, President Hamid Karzai's brother Ahmed Wali Karzai, with revenue from heroin smuggling, customs-skimming and bribes.

Both men deny any wrongdoing. Col. Razzik, who has also been accused of running private jails and executing detainees, said he has challenged U.S. officials to find "at least one heroin lab" in his area.

The core of Col. Razzik's support comes from his Achakzai tribe, which has long controlled the drug trade in Spin Boldak and fielded a tribal militia to help the pro-Soviet regime in the 1980s. Col. Razzik, whose father served in that militia, says his current force is open to all tribes.

"His ideal candidate is a tough young kid with no family and no tribal ties," said Lt. Col. Hayes. "He brings them up and they're loyal to no one but him. It's kinda like the Foreign Legion."

Until recently, coalition officials cited tribal considerations, alongside with a desire to rein in Col. Razzik's power, as a reason why his force shouldn't be allowed to operate beyond Spin Boldak. A bloody operation by his men in Panjway district in 2006 had inflamed the rival Noorzai tribe, bolstering the Taliban's popularity there.

This past August, Kandahar governor Tooryalai Wesa and a gathering of top regional commanders turned to Col. Razzik when they decided to clear the city's Mahalajat suburb, a stronghold that the insurgents controlled for years, using its square to hang suspected collaborators.

Moving ahead of the American force a few days later, Col. Razzik sent scouts in civilian clothes to Mahalajat, seeking information about Taliban improvised-explosive device emplacements. "He's got a lot of money to throw around, and so he just hired local boys to mark these IEDs," says Lt. Col. Hayes, who participated in the operation.

Mahalajat fell with little combat. The most notorious engagement was when Col. Razzik's men fired a rocket-propelled grenade at a stolen and booby-trapped police vehicle. The RPG missed and hit a nearby tree— from which a Taliban suicide bomber fell, exploding in a fireball as he hit the ground. American officers say they aren't aware of any abuses or looting by Col. Razzik's force in Mahalajat and that all the prisoners he had taken were handed over to Afghan authorities.

In following weeks, Col. Razzik's new role was formally recognized by the U.S. military, and he has been partnered with the U.S. Special Operations Task Force-South for missions outside Spin Boldak. He has since led his men on clearing operations to seize Taliban redoubts in Arghandab, Panjway and Maaruf districts.

In some instances in Arghandab, witnesses and one American official say, his men forced—rather than hired—local villagers to walk ahead of them on booby-trapped roads, in hopes of avoiding Taliban IEDs. Col. Razzik denied this: "I have never used civilians. All my men are from local villages. People turn out to give me information about the Taliban."

In Panjway, Col. Razzik's reputation for ruthlessness was so strong that both the Taliban and the local civilians fled ahead of his troops. "When we heard that Razzik is coming, everyone just escaped," says Tooryalai, a 39-year-old farmer in Zangabad village. "If he captures anyone, he says you're either Taliban or support the Taliban. Even members of his own tribe have fled."

American commanders compare Col. Razzik's recent successes to the Iraqi army's offensive in Basra in 2008—the turning point that for the first time gave fledgling Iraqi security forces the confidence that they can beat back the insurgents.

"He's become a folk hero," says U.S. Army Col. Jeffrey Martindale, commander of the 1st Brigade, 4th Infantry Division, the American unit responsible for Kandahar city and Arghandab. "Afghans see him as the Afghan solution to their problems."

This reliance on local strongmen isn't limited to Kandahar. The U.S. military is now raising so-called local police forces, a network of anti-Taliban militias that are only loosely affiliated with the formal government structures and that have often been nurtured by Special Forces or the Central Intelligence Agency.

Col. Razzik, who says he has been working on some operations with the CIA but denies receiving the agency's money, is—alongside Ahmed Wali Karzai, the provincial council chief—a central actor in the crime-tainted political network that maintains a stranglehold over southern Afghanistan, allegedly rigging elections, collecting protection money and smuggling drugs.

Resentment over this network's behavior, U.S. officials have long said, is a key reason the Taliban have become so strong here. Yet, after a brief effort earlier this year to get President Karzai to remove his brother from Kandahar, and to curb Col. Razzik, coalition commanders say they have concluded that such men are their only significant allies in the south.

"What's the alternative?" wondered a senior military official in Kabul. "These powerbrokers will remain a fixture regardless of what we do. Whether they will modify their malignant activities over time remain to be seen—but you really have to work with them."

Lt. Col. Hayes, the Special Forces officer, says he has tried to make Col. Razzik change: "I told him—if you want to be on the national scene, you have to learn how to read and write, and you've got to cut all the bad things you've been doing in Spin Boldak."

In response, Lt. Col. Hayes recalls, Col. Razzik "kind of nodded, and didn't give an answer. "