Osama Bin Laden's Files Reveal Terror Secrets??
 

Why the hell is this administration leaking info on what it found or didn't find in Bin Laden's compound.

Is it to our advantage that the enemy knows we found this or anything else for that matter. Maybe they don't know what info or material was left intact and is in our hands. Well, I guess the administration thinks it's only fair to tell them.

For cryin' out loud!!!!!

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/osama-...ry?id=13544154

I guess Osama's second-in-command ought to start packing, because it's been revealed we have info on his possible whereabouts. What kind of frickin' amateurs are running this show!!!

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_1...54-503543.html

At first I was thoroughly impressed that knowing what you do, you must have been sitting with the group of frickin' amateurs who mistakenly released the information and is now collectively distraught and ready to resign having realized how their blunder compromises our intelligence advantage and transfers that advantage to al Quaeda. Why didn't you say something ?!

But then a reliable source told me that this happened while you were out of the meeting on a bathroom break. The group decided to release the information because for every single released detail, they knew, al Quaeda knew, that we knew. It was another calculated way to keep the enemy off guard and at a disadvantage in the eyes of the world. It's part of the regular war or words and innuendo.

See, sometimes when you don't have all the facts, it makes sweeping judgements and indictments seem kind of premature and foolish.

RichieLion, I had the exact same thought, when I heard we were spouting off what we had learned. I'm sure the enemy figures we got info, but why confirm it? We seem to be very specific about what we have learned. I can't think of any good reason to be telling the world.

If you had just waited a few more hours before jumping to your conclusions you too would have seen the five videos of bin Laden which are now being shown everywhere; an old disheveled man watching his own speeches. These images now become the latest and most often used by the media, replacing the 'romantic warrior' photos of the younger horseman with AK-47 across his lap. Those the images that captured the attention and inspired thousands of restless mid-eastern teenagers.

Nice spin, but that's not what we're talking about. We talking about plans and strategies and instructions that were found in documents and on computers. We're talking about informations that could lead to the whereabouts of the 2nd in command. Why say anything about having or not having such data.

We not taking about his home movies. Will you defend anything this administration does?

Sometimes you have to think like a fox. Has anyone given thought to the very good possibility that what has been said to be on the computer disks, etc is just misinformation so others may think we have more than what we do?

Also, do not think that the Army, Navy, or Federal government is going to give out complete information that will be helpful to the bad guys. Just some tantilizing little bits that we may or may not have. Trust me, there is a huge amount of information that is being held back from newspapers and the public - as it should be.

What you see is not necessarily what you have. When you play poker, you do not turn over all the cards at one time. Your government knows this, too. It does not matter if it were Bush, Clinton, Reagan, or Obama. I am not just defending this administration but all administrations.

No, I don't defend everything the Administration does. I have defended some things for very specific reasons which I try to formulate carefully and factually. What I rarely do is cite the words of others, especially "experts" to form my opinions.

But I do get tired of reading sweeping indictments of governmental agents or agencies, especially when it is obviously done to further one's incredible bias against a particular Administration.

My original response to you said the information disclosed had no import as "secret" information any longer. it could be used instead as public evidence to the world and other terrorists that the mission had been successful. That's a good message to send.

Here's my challenge to you: make a case, if you can, to bolster your sweeping indictment. Find some specific data among that which was released and then SHOW how publication of that data is detrimental to the national interest.

i don't buy it Bugs. Incompetent Biden even leaked the fact that the raid was carried out by Navy Seals when the administration was taking pains to only refer to them as "commandos". There is lots of incompetence in evidence. There are amateurs here who just can't stay in the background, and leak info to show "Hey, I know something you don't".

Why don't you write the White House Bugs. You might be spinning the foul ups better than they are.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/0...ndos-as-seals/

I glad you have intimate communications with the administration and that they're advising you on their national security strategies.

I didn't say any info was released, only that it was reported that Al Qaeda documents were found which contained sensitive info. Even that leak is amateurish, in my humble opinion.

Maybe Richie should volunteer as a national security advisor,

Richie:

1) When using the term 'commandos' that pretty much leaves two options. The Army's "Delta Force" or Navy "SEALS". Do you really think it matters if someone know which patch these super-skilled people wore?

2) When releasing the videos, have you noticed something that only a few sources have mentioned? That is, it's video only, no audio. The two reports I read that mentioned that (out of dozens) specifically stated that it was so no 'code words' could be heard by terrorists out there.

3) It DOES help to destroy the "bin Laden as Saladin" imagery when you show him, not only as an old man wrapped in a blanket, but showing how he dressed himself up (dyeing his beard, etc) when preparing to make a public video.

And before you think I defend everything this administration does, I do NOT agree with not releasing the death picture. One reason we released Uday and Qusay's pictures was to show supporters AND opponents what happens to people on the wrong side of the fight. Supporters to give them strength in a fight that can seem endless at times and opponents to show them what's in store for them.

It seems it mattered to somebody as it was kept confidential for a reason, which it seems you disagree with because of your intimate knowledge of military covert affairs, but it was then leaked by our indiscreet vice-president which is a surprise to no one.

Again, I'm not talking about the stupid home videos, I'm talking about the release of information that the "commandos" found a treasure trove of documents. We don't know what bin Laden's organization knows or doesn't know of what we found. There is no good reason to tell them that I can think of.

Richie,

You and I agree on this matter. Yes, we do have a lot of incompetents and foot-in-mouths (Biden and others). However, I worked with the Federal government for many years, and I know that even though it may seem as though all information has been released; the most classified is not released.

I thought it was funny in today's newspaper describing bin Laden as an old man looking at a small computer screen on a rickety table. I bet in his "hideout" which was a huge compound, bin Laden had a pretty good life and was probably watchiing a huge flat-screen television with satellite coverage of all world-wide channels.

Personally, I think we should demand immediate payback of our foreign aid from Pakistan for them shielding bin Laden - or impose some shock and awe upon them (back to the Stone Age).

We definitely need some explaining from their government on this matter. It's probably not feasible to demand much payback because we depend on their hospitality to coordinate anti-terrorist affairs in their country, and we get it despite the animosity of much of their population. Also we need their government remain as stable as possible in order to keep some control on their nuclear capabilities. It's a logistical "pickle" we're in over there.

Just one more observation on the "home videos" that everyone is talking about, but that I wasn't. I don't think much of bin Laden's "fans" over there are going to be too disheartened in seeing his living conditions, as some have indicated. I don't think too many are living as well as he did.

Hope I was not being too liberal in my previous post.

I think part of the goal was also to sell continuing operations to the American public. In other words, if they DIDN'T let out that they had information (without giving specifics), would we have a "bring them home - the job's done" opinion swelling here.

I mean, aren't you the same people who say that Obama is coldly calculating things to get his desired effects - supposedly in Marxist styles?

So why suddenly be 'careless'. No, I think it was VERY calculated to let the fact out that it wasn't JUST the death of bin Laden that we got from the raid.

You continue the same old thing: Rail from the rooftops about the Administration without a single scrap of any factual data to back up your sweeping criticisms. On the bin Laden matter I challenged you to find anything divulged by anyone thus far which you can SHOW is detrimental to national security. You keep answering posts but you continue to ignore the challenge. I think the the old adage applies here -"put up , or shut up".

You have no understanding on what I am saying here and the evidence is your post.

Lots of surmising. I'm only relating what's happened, and that is that intel was released to the public. I guess you're entitled to your assumptions about the why's and wherefores.

Even from a cynical point of view, I could come up with more reasons.. For example, trying to justify their actions (keeping Guantanamo open) that angered their base over the last 18 months.

From a purely selfish standpoint, it DOES score points for them (the Administration).

I repeat. Perhaps Richie should volunteer as a national security advisor.

Let me try to put my reasoning on this in a way that may be more easily understood by you and the others who just like to yell at me.

My football team is competing with your football team. I have come into possession of your playbook. You don't know this. You have a suspicion that I might because I was in a place where one might be kept.

Is it in my best interests, if I'd like to keep and exploit my advantage, to let you know that "Yeah, I found it!!".

If my team executes the playbook properly I really don't care if you have it. But I don't see that the analogy works. Even though you won't agree, I doubt that the Obama administration would be dumb enough to do as you suggest.

Does it really matter?

Rep. Chuck Schumer just showed how he can't read. (He wants to make a 'no ride' list for Amtrak like the 'no-fly' list)

The intel coming back from Pakistan said that bin Laden was thinking about trying something on 9/11/11. One idea was to sabotage a train to make it fall off a bridge and, presumably, kill everyone on board.

Now, let's put our thinking caps on.

Does it make sense to repeat the mistakes of the past and try to smuggle a bomber on a train? It hasn't worked well. In addition, a bomb that is 'smuggle-able' would most likely take out one car and cause a derailment of the others.

I think the Bad Guy would have emulated a VERY successful sabotage of a train line out west where some rails were pried partially apart so that they were misaligned. Train goes over, derails, plunges into a small ravine.

Do that on a large bridge for a train that is scheduled to pass over in the middle of the night and you have a terror-inducing attack.

That's right. Attack the TRACK, not the train and you can do it when nobody is around. Sure, there's a lot of track out there that is geared towards signaling an alert if someone starts tampering with it, but I know more than one railroad that does NOT employ that technology.

What does a "no-ride" list for Amtrak accomplish? Nothing. It's more Security Theater to make you thing they are Doing Something so that they can justify their ever-increasing budgets.

Perhaps legislooters should have to take an IQ-test before being sworn in.

Then you would be wrong.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/osama-...ry?id=13544154

My original post was a counter to your relentless search for any conceivable way to blast the Administration for anything you can dream up. This time you picked the "leaking" of supposed secret information by what you called "frickin' amateurs".
I said you could not cite a single piece of data which has been discussed in the media and is by it's release a problem for anyone loyal to this country. You've made a few feeble attempts to refer to specifics, but the above answers to those references have made a better case for releasing the data than not.
The fact is that YOU do not know what you are talking about in this matter, and using it as a vehicle to bash the Administration again is ample evidence of how anxious you are to advance your beliefs, regardless of what facts get in the way.

Richie,there will be many opportunities for you to bash Obama and some of them might even be within reason. However in this case you are just showing your utter disdain for Obama and it really makes you and your viewpoints very petty. I cant believe I'm even responding to this thread,I must be bored.

I can't make myself any clearer. It just has to be that you would argue the point no matter how simply I present it. It's really not complicated. Cie la vie.