Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

[LargoWinch]

Everything to justify Gitmo and torture...

Forget the cover story of waterboarding-leads-to-courier-leads-to bin Laden. Sources in the intelligence community tell me that after years of trying and one bureaucratically insane near-miss in Yemen, the US government killed OBL because a Pakistani intelligence officer came forward to collect the approximately $25 million reward from the State Department’s Rewards for Justice program.
The informant was a walk-in.

The ISI officer came forward to claim the substantial reward and to broker US citizenship for his family. My sources tell me that the informant claimed that the Saudis were paying off the Pakistani military and intelligence (ISI) to essentially shelter and keep bin Laden under house arrest in Abbottabad, a city with such a high concentration of military that I’m told there’s no equivalent in the US.

...

Full article here.

[Slimprofits]

Re: Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

well this is interesting.
not sure what to make of it just yet.
let us examine who is RJ Hillhouse?
she didn't post to her blog for 2.5 years until 8/7/11.
http://www.thespywhobilledme.com/the_spy_who_billed_me/

[don]

Re: Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

The OBL charade will be milked for whatever use it can be. Who doesn't expect the made-for-TV movie to be made soon that 'explains' what really happened.

Paul Craig Roberts has his teeth in this question and hasn't let it slide down the memory hole.

The Mysterious Death of Osama bin Laden: Creating Evidence Where There Is None

by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

The New Yorker has published a story planted on Nicholas Schmidle by unidentified sources who claim to be familiar with the alleged operation that murdered Osama bin Laden.

There is no useful information in the story. Its purpose seems simply to explain away or cover up holes in the original story, principally why did the Seals murder an unarmed, unresisting Osama bin Laden whose capture would have resulted in a goldmine of terrorist information and whose show trial would have rescued the government’s crumbling 9/11 story?

The gullible Schmidle tells us: “‘There was never any question of detaining or capturing him--it wasn’t a split-second decision. No one wanted detainees,’ the special-operations officer told me.” In other words, the SEALs murdered bin Laden, because the US government did not want detainees, not because trigger-happy stupid SEALs destroyed a font of terrorist information.

Why did the SEALS dump bin Laden’s body in the ocean instead of producing the evidence to a skeptical world?

No real explanation, just that SEALS had done the same thing to other victims. Schmidle writes: “All along, the SEALs had planned to dump bin Laden’s corpse into the sea--a blunt way of ending the bin Laden myth.” But before they did so, the US checked with an unidentified Saudi intelligence operative, who allegedly replied, “Your plan sounds like a good one.”

I mean, really.

After all of Sy Hersh’s New Yorker revelations of US government lies and plots, one can understand the pressure that might have been applied to the New Yorker to publish this fairy tale. But what is extraordinary is that there was a real story that Schmidle and the New Yorker could have investigated.

In the immediate aftermath of bin Laden’s alleged murder by the SEALs, Pakistani TV interviewed the next door neighbor to bin Laden’s alleged compound. Someone supplied the video with an English translation running at the bottom of the video. According to the translation, the next door neighbor, Mr. Bashir, said that he watched the entire operation from the roof of his house. There were 3 helicopters. Only 1 landed. About a dozen men got out and entered the house. They shortly returned and boarded the helicopter. When the helicopter lifted off it exploded, killing all aboard. Mr. Bashir reports seeing bodies and pieces of bodies all over.

The US government acknowledges that it lost a helicopter, but claims no one was hurt. Obviously, as there were no further landings, if everyone was killed as Mr. Bashir reports, there was no body to be dumped into the ocean.

A real investigation would begin with Mr. Bashir’s interview. Was he actually saying what the English translation reported? I have not been able to find the interview with the English translation, but I believe this is the interview that I saw.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0vo-L3VACs

Surely there is a qualified interpreter who can tell us what Mr. Bashir is saying. If the English translation that I saw is not a hoax, then we are presented with a story totally different from the one the government told us and repeated again through Mr. Schmidle.

If the English translation of Mr. Bashir’s interview is correct, one would think that there would be some interest on the part of US news organizations and on the part of the intelligence committees in Congress to question Mr. Bashir and his neighbors, many of whom are also interviewed on Pakistani TV saying that they have lived in Abbottabad all their lives and are absolutely certain that Osama bin Laden was not among them.

Mr. Schmidle goes to lengths to describe the SEALs’ weapons, although his story makes it clear that no weapons were needed as bin Laden is described as “unarmed” and undefended. The “startled” bin Laden didn’t even hear the helicopters or all the SEALs coming up the stairs. In addition to all his fatal illnesses which most experts believe killed him a decade ago, bin Laden must have been deaf as neighbors report that the sound of the helicopters was “intense.”

When Pakistanis on the scene in Abbottabad report a totally different story from the one that reaches us second and third hand from unidentified operatives speaking to reporters in the US who have never been to Abbottabad, shouldn’t someone qualified look into the story?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...t=va&aid=25898

[D-Mack]

Re: Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

Lies on top of lies...

Now the Seals story is changing

SEALs killed in Afghan crash were answering call for help

Providing new details, Western officials say a helicopter carrying Navy SEALs, Afghan commandos and other U.S. troops was shot down as it arrived to answer a call for help from another elite force.


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,2270664.story

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

Lies on top of lies...

Now the Seals story is changing

Could you elaborate on the story changing?

It's my understanding that the folks on the helo may have been performing the role of QRF(Quick Reaction Force) to assist a Ranger unit already under contact.

There is some noise on the net about Pakistanis allegedly helping the local bad guys to entice these particular folks(from the unit likely responsible for the Bin Laden raid) into a set ambush by dangling a high value target in front of them that would call for the use of a special mission unit such as this one.

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

The OBL charade will be milked for whatever use it can be. Who doesn't expect the made-for-TV movie to be made soon that 'explains' what really happened.

Paul Craig Roberts has his teeth in this question and hasn't let it slide down the memory hole.

The Mysterious Death of Osama bin Laden: Creating Evidence Where There Is None

by Dr. Paul Craig Roberts

The New Yorker has published a story planted on Nicholas Schmidle by unidentified sources who claim to be familiar with the alleged operation that murdered Osama bin Laden.

There is no useful information in the story. Its purpose seems simply to explain away or cover up holes in the original story, principally why did the Seals murder an unarmed, unresisting Osama bin Laden whose capture would have resulted in a goldmine of terrorist information and whose show trial would have rescued the government’s crumbling 9/11 story?

The gullible Schmidle tells us: “‘There was never any question of detaining or capturing him--it wasn’t a split-second decision. No one wanted detainees,’ the special-operations officer told me.” In other words, the SEALs murdered bin Laden, because the US government did not want detainees, not because trigger-happy stupid SEALs destroyed a font of terrorist information.

Why did the SEALS dump bin Laden’s body in the ocean instead of producing the evidence to a skeptical world?

No real explanation, just that SEALS had done the same thing to other victims. Schmidle writes: “All along, the SEALs had planned to dump bin Laden’s corpse into the sea--a blunt way of ending the bin Laden myth.” But before they did so, the US checked with an unidentified Saudi intelligence operative, who allegedly replied, “Your plan sounds like a good one.”

I mean, really.

After all of Sy Hersh’s New Yorker revelations of US government lies and plots, one can understand the pressure that might have been applied to the New Yorker to publish this fairy tale. But what is extraordinary is that there was a real story that Schmidle and the New Yorker could have investigated.

In the immediate aftermath of bin Laden’s alleged murder by the SEALs, Pakistani TV interviewed the next door neighbor to bin Laden’s alleged compound. Someone supplied the video with an English translation running at the bottom of the video. According to the translation, the next door neighbor, Mr. Bashir, said that he watched the entire operation from the roof of his house. There were 3 helicopters. Only 1 landed. About a dozen men got out and entered the house. They shortly returned and boarded the helicopter. When the helicopter lifted off it exploded, killing all aboard. Mr. Bashir reports seeing bodies and pieces of bodies all over.

The US government acknowledges that it lost a helicopter, but claims no one was hurt. Obviously, as there were no further landings, if everyone was killed as Mr. Bashir reports, there was no body to be dumped into the ocean.

A real investigation would begin with Mr. Bashir’s interview. Was he actually saying what the English translation reported? I have not been able to find the interview with the English translation, but I believe this is the interview that I saw.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0vo-L3VACs

Surely there is a qualified interpreter who can tell us what Mr. Bashir is saying. If the English translation that I saw is not a hoax, then we are presented with a story totally different from the one the government told us and repeated again through Mr. Schmidle.

If the English translation of Mr. Bashir’s interview is correct, one would think that there would be some interest on the part of US news organizations and on the part of the intelligence committees in Congress to question Mr. Bashir and his neighbors, many of whom are also interviewed on Pakistani TV saying that they have lived in Abbottabad all their lives and are absolutely certain that Osama bin Laden was not among them.

Mr. Schmidle goes to lengths to describe the SEALs’ weapons, although his story makes it clear that no weapons were needed as bin Laden is described as “unarmed” and undefended. The “startled” bin Laden didn’t even hear the helicopters or all the SEALs coming up the stairs. In addition to all his fatal illnesses which most experts believe killed him a decade ago, bin Laden must have been deaf as neighbors report that the sound of the helicopters was “intense.”

When Pakistanis on the scene in Abbottabad report a totally different story from the one that reaches us second and third hand from unidentified operatives speaking to reporters in the US who have never been to Abbottabad, shouldn’t someone qualified look into the story?

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...t=va&aid=25898

Author fails to consider and make readers aware of the very distinct possibility of "witnesses" being coopted by Pakistani ISI.

For those watching, Pakistani ISI are a fairly capable organization with an extensive history in media ops that would dovetail nicely with EJ's own Meme Management train of thought.

[LargoWinch]

Re: Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

Could you elaborate on the story changing?

I think D-Mack provided the wrong link. See:

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

I think D-Mack provided the wrong link. See:

In terms of their mission on the day changing from a QRD support/rescue op supporting Rangers to a dedicated assault group once the Rangers had flushed out an HVT or garden variety bad guys does it really matter?

And wouldn't it make sense to try and obfusciate intent to the enemy who are watching?

Rather than confirm or change their own intelligence picture, why not leave them guessing, possibly intentionally?

Kinda hard when the military is involved in a conflict and the rest of the country is at the mall. <----kinda stole that one from elsewhere.

If anyone is going down the conspiracy theory track of thinking the OBL op was a mess and this loss is cleaning it up like in a bad spy novel needs to take crazy pills in my opinion.

The guys in units like DEVRU(SEAL TEam 6) and CAG(Delta or whatever it's name is now) work in special mission units(SMUs).

They tend to avoid the run of the mill grunt work......why use a scalpel when a sledgehammer works better and cheaper for a particular job?

And they also quite likely work(at times) in the more sensitive side of operations....including grey role stuff out of uniform.....and in joint operations with the 3 letter agencies.

So maybe a few of these fellas were involved in ops, and not necessarily in THAT theatre of operations, where disclosing their names and photos might be useful to the enemy or potential enemies.

While it's true that when other American servicemen in special operations have been killed their photos and bios have been available to the public......it is possible to disclose the information in a way to reduce the likelihood of an enemy adding 1 + 1 and making 3 when it comes to guys in the special mission units.

More fodder for the conspiracy theorists, certainly.

Maybe it's a bit harder to achieve that when the number is so substantial.

[KGW]

Re: Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

Here's an excerpt from a recent Pepe Escobar piece:

"A close comparison between the Abbottabad and Wardak operations may raise a forest of eyebrows - apart from puncturing the myth of Navy SEALs as invincible, larger-than-life hunter-killers. In Abbottabad, as version after version of the raid was being fed to the media, it was finally established that a stealth helicopter simply "crashed". No one knows if this was a pilot error or the helicopter was shot at.

The fact is the "crash" left an intact tail section of the stealth helicopter inside the compound - that tail section that left the Pentagon freaking out it would be "sold" to the Chinese by the Pakistanis. It's quite a stretch to believe this crash generated no casualties - according to the Pentagon/White House spin.

And because the Bin Laden raid narrative was redacted over and over again, febrile minds are already linking these casualties to the Wardak death toll - implying the SEALs who actually died in the Abbottabad crash have now died "again" in Wardak. It doesn't help that the initial versions of the Wardak hit (later corrected or redacted) identified the SEALs as the same ones who took part in the "kill Osama" raid."

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/MH10Df01.html

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

Here's an excerpt from a recent Pepe Escobar piece:

"A close comparison between the Abbottabad and Wardak operations may raise a forest of eyebrows - apart from puncturing the myth of Navy SEALs as invincible, larger-than-life hunter-killers. In Abbottabad, as version after version of the raid was being fed to the media, it was finally established that a stealth helicopter simply "crashed". No one knows if this was a pilot error or the helicopter was shot at.

The fact is the "crash" left an intact tail section of the stealth helicopter inside the compound - that tail section that left the Pentagon freaking out it would be "sold" to the Chinese by the Pakistanis. It's quite a stretch to believe this crash generated no casualties - according to the Pentagon/White House spin.

And because the Bin Laden raid narrative was redacted over and over again, febrile minds are already linking these casualties to the Wardak death toll - implying the SEALs who actually died in the Abbottabad crash have now died "again" in Wardak. It doesn't help that the initial versions of the Wardak hit (later corrected or redacted) identified the SEALs as the same ones who took part in the "kill Osama" raid."

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/MH10Df01.html

A couple things:

I haven't seen anything released or leaked that claims the same pers who performed the OBL raid were the same pers on the Wardak op gone bad....same UNIT....but not same pers.

It's actually a bit dissappointing to see leaks about which specific special mission unit within the US special operations community was involved......could be amateur hour within the administration, or it could be a machiavellian leak within the US military community to "get on the radar" come appropriations time when the future looks like the military funding tap will soon be turning towards the off position...or some maybe other reason entirely......whatever the reason....totally unprofessional....should be generic "military special operations".

My guess is the LAST thing the folks directly involved with the raids want is publicity of any kind...good or bad.

The helo crash is an interesting one(actually for BOTH crashes)......high altitude and temperature adversely affect helo performance. The crash on the OBL raid could include factors such as altitude, temperature, and obstructions like walls in a low altitude hover.

Crew and passenger survivibility for modern military helos is a serious design consideration....more leaning towards crew than passengers with crash/impact absorbing design characteristics. Aircraft are expensive to manufacture....and the folks flying them and flying IN them are also very expensive to "manufacture" so design to mitigate their injury/death in a crash is a worthwhile investment.

ANY helo, let alone one that offers undisclosed capabilities, would be destroyed if damaged and unrecoverable in a non-permissive environment...particularly communications and encryption related gear...that would be standard operating procedure. SO it could have simply been a very hard landing due to the specific circumstances...back in the raid on Son Tay back in Vietnam the executed plan included an intentional helo controlled crash into the middle of the POW camp.

The CH47 that was shot down most recently is from a family of helos that is considered to offer the most general purpose capability in high altitude, high temperature Afghanistan......Afghanistan is a VERY harsh operating environment for rotary wing aircraft.

And the fact that it was a National Guard airframe instead of one from the 160th could easily be argued by the author's own admission that up to dozens of raids a day are being conducted......there's only so much of the shiniest bits of kit to go around...sometimes you have to use what you've got on the day or nothing at all.

Fodder for the conspiracy theorists and pulp fiction writers, I suspect the timeline for the official message and attributed sources from reasonably well respected outlets would be less spicey......

The best description I've heard yet is from a mate who described the OBL raid and blowback as "The administration is doing a victory lap in a clown car."

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

Everything to justify Gitmo and torture...

A friend's email just pointed out the fact that the blog author is a spy fiction writer.

I wonder if she has a new book out?

[D-Mack]

Re: Bin Laden Turned in by Informant — Courier Was Cover Story

Mission Unnecessary?

TED ALJIBE/AFP/Getty Images
The forces were traveling in a Chinook helicopter, like the one above, when it was shot down by an insurgent.


Growing indications SEALs sent on low-level mission.


By Yochi J. Dreazen
Updated: August 11, 2011 | 5:42 p.m.
August 11, 2011 | 1:19 p.m.

There are growing indications that the U.S. military should never have launched the ill-fated helicopter mission that sent 38 U.S. and Afghan troops crashing to their deaths in eastern Afghanistan.










The military initially said that the troops -- including 22 Navy SEALs -- who died on Saturday were on their way to rescue a contingent of Army Rangers who were pinned down by insurgents, only to drop that account on Wednesday. Now officials say the troops were sent to apprehend fleeing militants, a far lower-level mission that could have been carried out by smaller numbers of conventional forces. The Rangers had been sent to Wardak Province, a violent and sparsely-populated region of the country, in pursuit of a local Taliban commander thought to control a small network of local fighters.
The target escaped, and an array of current and retired Special Operations personnel believe the wanted militant was simply not a significant-enough Taliban leader to justify risking the lives of so many highly trained forces.
A former SEAL commander with extensive recent combat experience said he didn't know who the Taliban leader was, but there was no way he was worth losing 38 men.
In separate interviews, three active-duty Special Operations personnel leveled an additional critique. They told National Journal that the Rangers who'd asked for the reinforcements were ultimately able to push back the militants and secure the crash site on their own -- and without suffering any casualties. That was clear evidence, they say, that the SEALs hadn't been needed in the first place.


.....

http://www.nationaljournal.com/missi...0110811?page=1