Tag Archives: Osama bin Laden

Biden Challenges Clinton’s Story on Bin Laden Raid

WASHINGTON, October 21, 2015– Vice President Joe Biden has subtly called into question the role former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she played in the raid that killed al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden. He’s also tweaked his own role as the events unfolded.

In her 2014 book Hard Choices, Clinton says that she was an immediate supporter of the raid while Biden “remained skeptical.”

However, Biden said otherwise.

“Only two people who were definitive and were absolutely certain,” he said, referring to the men who were, respectively, the director of the CIA and the secretary of defense at the time. “Leon Panetta said, ‘Go,’ and Bob Gates — who has already publicly said this — said, ‘Don’t go.’ And others were at 59/41.”

At an event honoring former Vice President Walter Mondale on Tuesday, Biden continued to retell his account.

“We walked out of the room and walked upstairs,” Biden said. “I told him my opinion: I thought he should go, but to follow his own instincts.”

The new account of Biden’s advice differs drastically from what he said at a Democratic retreat in January 2012.

“Mr. President, my suggestion is, ‘Don’t go,'” Biden said, according to multiple news reports from that time.

Biden says the reason for the two separate accounts is because he told President Obama one thing in the situation room meeting, and another when in private.

“Imagine if I had said, in front of everyone, don’t go or go and his decision was a different decision,” said Biden. “It undercuts that relationship. So I never, on a difficult issue, never say what I think finally until I go up to the Oval with him alone.”

In addition, Biden also said only he and President Obama knew about crucial intelligence, which Clinton claims she knew about as well.

“The President and I, and only two others in the administration, knew about Abbottabad as early as August” 2010, Biden said Tuesday. “We did not go for almost a year to get him. And major players in the Cabinet did not know about it till January or February (2011).”

Meanwhile, Clinton says she learned about the intelligence in March 2011.

Biden has announced that he will not run for President.

For more election coverage, click here.

FOLLOW MICHAEL LOTFI ON Facebook, Twitter & LinkedIn.

Fmr CIA Deputy Director: Drones Do Radicalize But “No Other Alternative”

Washington, D.C.- Drones are “the most effective” weapon the US has in the war against terrorism, and while collateral damage does occur, “propaganda” makes it seem far worse than it actually is, according to former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell.

Morell sat down with Ben Swann to discuss drones, as well as a wide range of national security issues, including Iraqi WMDs and the raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

Morell tells Swann that the information the CIA had gathered on Saddam Hussein prior to the Iraq war was convincing but unfortunately was dated.  Morell goes on to say that the CIA did warn the Bush Administration that there was no link between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda and that it was the office of Vice President Dick Cheney who pushed the CIA to find a link between the two.

In the interview with Morell, Swann asks about the Seymour Hersh article on the killing of Osama bin Laden.  It is in that conversation that Swann asks a question Morell is unwilling to answer.

Dr. Ron Paul Asks Who is Telling The Truth About The Bin Laden Killing?

Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh’s recent blockbuster article claiming that the Obama Administration lied about the Navy Seal operation to kill Osama Bin Laden has set off a battle between the journalist and the White House. Did the government lie about bin Laden?

Who do you think got it right? Comment below.

The Hersh Bombshell: “Allies” were guarding and funding America’s worst enemy

According to veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, the story the Obama Administration told about the killing of Osama bin Laden was just that- a story.

Hersh claims that the Pakistani military knew of the U.S. mission; that bin Laden was a prisoner in Abbottabad since 2006; that an ex-Pakistani official told the U.S. where bin Laden was in exchange for $25 million; and that there was no fire fight in bin Laden’s alleged compound.

The White House calls the claims baseless with too many inaccuracies to check each one.

Some have noted that it’s difficult to dismiss Hersh’s claims. “You don’t believe a story until it’s officially denied,” said Afshin Rattansi on RT.com.

The mainstream media has been aiming to discredit the story.

“The United States media won’t have it,” added Rattansi, who pointed out that Hersh had to get it published in the London Review of Books. “He can’t get them published in the land of the free.”

Hersh is a longtime contributor to The New Yorker.

In an article in New York magazine, Hersh said his relationship with The New Yorker has been tense and that they had already written a long-form feature about the killing of bin Laden, which focused on the action movie narrative from the administration.

Is Hersh’s story true? What do members of the U.S. military think of Hersh’s claims?

TruthInMedia.com’s Joshua Cook talked to a high ranking officer in the U.S. Army who said, “The Hersh article seems quite credible.”

One former Navy Seal told Cook, “Everyone in politics kills each other off with facts and fantasy.”

But it seems, according to Hersh, that the Bin Laden raid was just that- pure fantasy. “White House cooperated with Zero Dark Thirty. They did not cooperate with Seymour Hersh,” said Rattansi, pointing out that the Obama Administration provided guidance to the makers of Zero Dark Thirty, a Hollywood film about the mission to kill bin Laden.

One of the most disturbing points in Hersh’s article is the claim that the Pakistanis captured Osama bin Laden in 2006 in the Hindu Kush and the Saudis were financing the Pakistanis to keep him from the U.S.

Hersh told Scott Horton in an exclusive interview that Saudi Arabia financed this imprisonment, so Bin Laden wouldn’t reveal who was funding him (Listen here at 10:45).

The New York Times makes an important point: if Pakistan knew where bin Laden was or were holding him in prison as they claim, they were complicit in hiding a man charged with international terrorism and on the United Nations sanctions list.

It certainly makes one wonder even more about those censored 28-pages of the 9/11 report. What lengths will the U.S. government go to protect the Saudi royal family and our so-called allies who finance global terrorism?

For more on this story, click here.

To see RT America’s full interview with Seymour Hersh, watch here:

CIA “Ghost Money” Funneled to Al Qaeda

When Afghan officials had to gather $5 million in ransom to free a diplomat held by Al Qaeda, they dug deep, according to the New York Times, and gave U.S. money given to them by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

According to the Times, Afghanistan received monthly cash deliveries from the CIA to the presidential palace in Kabul. Afghan officials said they had squirreled away about $1 million of that fund.

Al Qaeda was rejuvenated after receiving that money.

Atiyah Adb al-Rahman, Al Qaeda’s general manager, wrote to Osama bin Laden in June 2010 claiming that the money would be used for weapons and other operations. “God blessed us with a good amount of money this month,” he wrote.

In a letter back, bin Laden expressed concern about the newfound wealth:

“There is a possibility — not a very strong one — that the Americans are aware of the money delivery, and that they accepted the arrangement of the payment on the basis that the money will be moving under air surveillance,” bin Laden wrote.

But, the Times pointed out, the money wasn’t a trap: “It was just another in a long list of examples of how the United States, largely because of poor oversight and loose financial controls, has sometimes inadvertently financed the very militants it is fighting.”

This is not the first report of “ghost money,” off-the-books cash being funneled in secret to the Afghan government. New York Times reporter Matthew Rosenberg exposed “America’s conflicting priorities” in a 2013 report.

It’s apparently clear that America’s current foreign policy strategy is in major need of reform. If America is waging a war on global terrorism, then why are we funding our enemies?

Reports from investigative reporters like Rosenberg and Ben Swann have both presented cases regarding the U.S. government’s involvement in funding Islamic terrorist groups. See Ben Swann’s report on the Origin of ISIS.

BenSwann.com’s Joshua Cook asked award-winning journalist and researcher Nizar Nayouf his thoughts on the New York Times report.

Though Nayouf doesn’t consider himself an expert in the affairs of Afghanistan and “al-Qaeda” in Afghanistan, he considers this story very familiar because he said it mirrors what’s happening now in Syria.

Nayouf told Cook: “Now we know that Qatar, under the direction of the US, has paid 25 million dollars as a ransom to Jabhat Al-Nusrah (Al-Qaeda in Syria) for releasing the UN peacekeepers in the occupied Syrian Golan, who had been kidnapped by groups funded and armed by the Gulf States, especially Qatar; and other millions for releasing Lebanese civilian hostages (pilgrims) kidnapped by other groups funded and armed by Saudi Arabia and the United States.”

“In fact, according to well-documented information, the mechanism of paying ransoms for releasing hostages has become part of the United States and its Gulf allies’ policy to fund terrorist groups away from the legal monitoring of financial transactions,” he added.

“After the UN categorized ISIS and Jabhat Al-Nusrah as terrorist groups, it has become more difficult for those countries to finance these groups, The Qatari and Saudi Arabia intelligence services have resorted to direct these groups to kidnap hostages, then Qatar or Saudi Arabia pays a ransom. This mechanism makes the financing of terrorist groups seems as if to be “legit.” This is what I call “laundering terrorism’s money” or “ financing terrorism by terrorism,” said Nayouf.

Ex-SEAL steps up, says he killed Osama bin Laden

Robert O’Neill, a former Navy SEAL, spoke with the Washington Post and revealed he was the shooter who killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.

O’Neill, 38, was a 15 year veteran with the SEALs and was involved in various other missions before, said he thought this mission would be his most difficult up to that point.

When he and other SEALs stormed the compound holding bin Laden, O’Neill says he was near the front of the column and thought he would be killed.

Upon entering the room holding bin Laden, O’Neill says bin Laden “had his hands on a woman’s shoulders pushing her ahead,” in the hopes of deflecting the attackers.  O’Neill then says he shot bin Laden in the head twice before other members of the SEAL team shot bin Laden’s already dead body.

Leading up to O’Neill’s decision to disclose this information, he says he was struggling with whether or not to go public with his identity.  He says there was already a network of people who knew his identity, including various members of congress and at least two news organizations.

Colleagues have voiced their displeasure with his decision, and B.L. Losey, the Naval Special Warfare commanding officer, and M.L. Magaraci, the force’s master chief, wrote a letter saying one tenet of their profession is to “not advertise the nature of [their] work nor seek recognition for [their] actions.”

However, after speaking with the families of victims of the 9/11 attacks, O’Neill said he decided to come forward.  “The families told me it helped bring them some closure,” said O’Neill.

This was not his first high profile mission, O’Neill said.  He also disclosed he was part of the rescue effort of Capt. Richard Phillips in 2009 after his vessel was taken captive by Somali pirates.

Bill Clinton Speaking About Osama bin Laden in 2001: “I Could Have Gotten Him, I Could Have Killed Him”

Australian news channel Sky News released an audio clip late Wednesday of former president Bill Clinton speaking at a business meeting in Melbourne on September 10th, 2001. In the Sky News clip shown, there is a small portion of audio in which Clinton claimed that he had the chance to kill Osama bin Laden.

Clinton then revealed that he ultimately decided not to go after bin Laden at that time because of the surrounding circumstances; Clinton said he would have had to destroy a small town full of innocent civilians.

“He’s [bin Laden] a very smart guy. I spent a lot of time thinking about him. And I nearly got him once,” Clinton said. “And I could have killed him, but I would have to destroy a little town called Kandahar in Afghanistan and kill 300 innocent women and children, and then I would have been no better than him. And so I just didn’t do it.”

That short audio clip is currently the only released segment of the meeting where Clinton was speaking. It was made public by Michael Kroger, the former head of Australia’s Liberal Party who has been reported to be the individual who recorded it.