Officials: SEALs thought bin Laden went for weapon

news.yahoo.com ^ | 5/4/2011 | news.yahoo.com

[mewykwistmas]

"The terrorist leader was killed by American commandos who burst into his room and feared he was reaching for a nearby weapon, U.S. officials said."

... "The officials who gave the latest details said a U.S. commando grabbed a woman who charged toward the SEALs inside the room. They said the raiders were concerned that she might be wearing a suicide vest." ... Attorney General Eric Holder told Congress the operation was "entirely lawful and consistent with our values" and justified as "an action of national self-defense." Noting that bin Laden had admitted his involvement in the events of nearly a decade ago, he said, "It's lawful to target an enemy commander in the field."

Holder also said the team that carried out the raid had been trained to take bin Laden alive if he was willing to surrender. "It was a kill-or-capture mission," he said. "He made no attempt to surrender."

[DallasSun]

I do not know about you, Col., but I will go with the Seals’ account. Every time.

[Tallguy]

3. Debrief all the individuals involved in the operation. Prepare a classified after-action report so that the Truth can be known. Absolutely no mention of “sources & methods” in the executive summary of the report.

The problem with the Obama-bunch is that they run their mouths in total ignorance and without regard to what the facts may be.

[Rome2000]

I have one of those by my bed, reasonable to expect that OBL would as well,he being scared of Seals and me scared of crooks let loose by liberals like Holder

As for Holder, ponder the following:

As an “ordinary American,” I sincerely question whether Barack Obama has the judgment to be president. His lack of judgment in choosing Eric Holder as a top adviser on his campaign — the man partly responsible for pardoning terrorists who proudly claimed responsibility for my father’s murder — serves as primary evidence supporting that judgment.

Holder now leads Obama’s team selecting his running mate for vice president, perhaps Obama’s most important decision during the campaign. Mr. Holder, formerly the No. 2 official in former President Bill Clinton’s Justice Department, often is mentioned as a potential attorney general in an Obama administration. This is the same man who was a driving force behind President Clinton’s pardons of members of the notorious Puerto Rican terrorist group, the Armed Forces for National Liberation (FALN).

The FALN was one of the most prolific terrorist organizations ever to wage war against the American people. They proudly claimed responsibility for over 130 bombings and incendiary attacks in the U.S. and Puerto Rico between 1974 and 1983, killing six and wounding scores.

Among these vicious, cold-blooded attacks was the Jan. 24, 1975, lunchtime bombing at New York City’s historic Fraunces Tavern. Four innocent men were murdered that day, and one of them was my 33-year-old father, Frank Connor. My father had been very excited to get home from work that night to celebrate my brother’s and my recent 11th and 9th birthdays with his young family. Instead, after my father’s funeral, mourners shared a dinner in our home that was meant for our birthday celebration.

After members of the FALN were arrested, they threatened Judge Thomas McMillen’s life during their Chicago trial. Carmen Valentine told the judge, “You are lucky that we cannot take you right now,” and called the judge a terrorist. Dylcia Pagan warned the courtroom: “All of you, I would advise you to watch your backs.” And Ida Rodriguez told the judge, “You say we have no remorse. You’re right. … Your jails and your long sentences will not frighten us.” These terrorists convinced McMillen that they would continue being terrorists “as long as you live. If there was a death penalty, I’d impose the penalty on you without hesitation.”

Eight of these FALN terrorists later would receive pardons from President Clinton, even though they remained unrepentant. Indeed, after 18 years in prison, Ricardo Jimenez explained to Tim Russert on Meet the Press, just days after his release, that people died at Fraunces Tavern because “measures were not taken that were necessary by the people who owned those establishments.” As I watched this surreal interview I thought, “My father was eating lunch in a crowded restaurant in New York City. What precautions should the owners have taken?”

Former assistant U.S. Attorney and FALN prosecutor Deborah Devaney wrote in The Wall Street Journal on Sept. 7, 1999: “I know the chilling evidence that convicted the petitioners… . [T]he White House spun the tale that Mr. Clinton was freeing only those who had harmed no one…I would like the Connor family to know that the American justice system did not fail them, the President did.”

How does this outrageous and tragic story reflect on Barack Obama’s judgment?

Holder played a central role in freeing these terrorists. As the deputy attorney general, he was responsible for signing off on all clemency matters forwarded to the President, and in this case he recommended that clemency be granted — despite vehement opposition from the FBI, the Bureau of Prisons, and his own Justice Department.

In a September 1999 letter to House Judiciary Chairman Henry Hyde, FBI Director Louis Freeh explained that “the FBI has consistently advised the DOJ in writing that the FBI was opposed to any such pardon and or commutation of sentences for any of these individuals.” Freeh said clemency “would likely return committed, experienced, sophisticated and hardened terrorists to the clandestine movement.” Mr. Freeh emphasized “the FBI was unequivocally opposed to the release of these terrorists under any circumstances and had so advised the DOJ.” Moreover, in a letter to me dated Jan. 6, 1998, (more than a year before the pardons) a senior official from Holder’s own Justice Department expressly referred to the FALN members as “terrorists.”

Yet, according to Edward Lewine of the New York Daily News, despite this opposition, “Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder, the Justice Department official most involved with this issue, reportedly supported clemency.” Indeed, rather than consult with attack victims and their families, Mr. Holder instead met privately with members of Congress and recommended what the FALN members should do to facilitate a grant of presidential clemency.

Was Holder the obedient DAG providing the Clintons’ with justification for politically craven pardons? Or did Holder actually believe in unleashing unrepentant, communist terrorists on the public? Either way, should this man influence a potential VP selection or one day be the nation’s top law enforcement officer? Absolutely not.

The Connor family was shattered on Jan. 24, 1975. Eventually, some healing began. While not a day goes by without us thinking of him, my mom got remarried to a good man. My brother and I graduated college and established families of our own. Regrettably, Frank Connor would never get to hug his four beautiful grandchildren.

But in August 1999, the Clinton administration’s politically motivated pardons revived the terrible pain of our father’s murder. I realize that sociopath terrorists like the FALN lack remorse for their use of murder for political gain; but now our own government was disregarding my father’s life and death for some perceived political advantage.

Worse, releasing the terrorists placed the American people in danger. When I helped introduce the Pardon Attorney Reform and Integrity Act in February 2000, I warned about “the encouragement would-be terrorists must have received by the” FALN clemency grants. Unfortunately, that warning proved prophetic, and Sept. 11, 2001, took the life of my father’s 41-year-old godson, Steve Schlag, and 3,000 other innocent lives as my brother and I watched in horror from our downtown offices.

As Obama declares America needs his presidency because “ordinary Americans are hurting,” I recall the pain that one of his top advisers and a potential attorney general was an accomplice to inflicting on at least one “ordinary American” family. And then I am reminded how Holder’s actions also helped place America in harm’s way.

When he elevated Holder to such a senior campaign position, did Obama reflect the kind of judgment we need in a president? Absolutely not.

[bigheadfred]

They need to do this because of the ROE’s and to justify keeping our guys locked up in Leavenworth for doing the same as the SEALS.

[plain talk]

No it’s not the perfect answer. We should recite the facts but the defensive nature of these responses make me want to puke. We have nothing to be defensive about in killing Osama Bin Laden.

[Windflier]

...undeniable proof that Bin Laden was at that campound that night.

You're making a leap of logic. A photo of bin Laden's dead son only proves that bin Laden's son was there that night.

[Natural Law]

I’ll bet they thought that before they boarded the choppers.

[Col Frank Slade]

Agreed.

[HIDEK6]

The problem with the Obama-bunch is that they run their mouths in total ignorance and without regard to what the facts may be.

The problem with any rat administration is that they consider the first term to be OJT, and the press lets them get away with it.

[Nonsense Unlimited]

The commandos feared he had a weapon?
They were concerned he might have a weapon?

Note to the administration ... don’t demote our special forces to your pansy ass way of thinking.

They went in, performed their mission to near perfection and got out.

How about saying something like, “Our special forces went in a took out the man who orchestrated the deaths of over 10,000 people. We won’t reveal the details of these heroes as they are already on a plane to take out the next in line in AQ. We wish them Godspeed and a safe return. They are the reason you don’t have to sleep with one eye open.”

God bless all our troops.

[Licensed-To-Carry]

After they shot him, I hope one of them pissed on his head.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

Osama had money sewn into his clothes so he could have been shot while trying to escape. Suits me!

Actually, Osama was making love to his wife when the Seals burst in.

Being a true sportsman the SEAL shot him on the rise.

[Polybius]

The problem with the Obama-bunch is that they run their mouths in total ignorance and without regard to what the facts may be.

They also seem to have never heard about the "need to know" principle.

Look at the movie theater atmosphere as the facts about the raid are transmitted, live:

Does that brunnette in the back of the room "need to know" the exact details of whether Osama bin Ladin died reaching for a gun or if he died because of (insert whatever you wish here).

"OMG! Mom! You would NOT believe what I saw last night! Before I tell you, promise me and cross your heart that you won't tell your friends at the Book Club."

Not even, Hillary, the Secretary of State, "needs to know" how Obama was killed. She just needs to know that he died and she just needs to be able to look foreign heads of state right in the eye and be able to truthfully tell them, without any emotion and without covering her mouth, that she knows no details of how, exactly, Osama died.

[mewykwistmas]

“Actually, Osama was making love to his bacha bazi http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=bacha%20bazi when the Seals burst in. “

---

I agree

[bmwcyle]

This is bull crap.

[2nd Amendment]

when attempting to capture terrorists, even the blink of an eyelid or the exhaling of air can be construed as a direct threat!

[Mike Darancette]

Why are they identifying the SEALs by name? Anyway all the bodies shown look like head shots. Obama’s eye missing and shattered forehead sounds like an exit wound. I don’t think the military would shoot an unarmed man.

[raygun]

You have to understand that liberals are beholden to their ideologies at the expense of practical concerns; as a result pragmatism is tossed along with the baby. The overarching concern of liberals is how will it appear?

Doing the right thing is never part of the equation. The Clinton-era Gang of Four were unanimous in their dismissal of virtaully all courses of action w/respect to Nork sabre-rattling. The trumping reason cited in all cases: "how will it make us look?" Instead the chosen solution was appeasement through economic largess.

There's no doubt the present administration is squirming under the fierce heat of reality. Ideaology vaporizes under the intense brilliance of either practicality or pragmatism. That is a truism for both the left and the right.

I'm with you - as I belive the greater majority of Freepers to be - with regards to the 'grumpy' disposition. Allow me to be so bold as to profer the causa: we've become a jaded and cynical lot. With respect to the former, the duration of the slog we've endured to date (since sometime during X41's term), the latter entirely predicated on skepticism of the motives of ALL leadership over the previous two decades.

How many times will the Charlie Browns of this country allow Lucy to convince us to run up and kick the ball?

[Hacklehead]

“The terrorist leader was killed by American commandos who burst into his room and feared he was reaching for a nearby weapon, U.S. officials said.”

Are we expected to believe that with helicopters landing and a 40 minute firefight inside his compound, Osama didn’t reach for a weapon until Seals kicked in his door? Really? He must have been a VERRY heavy sleeper.

[raygun]

If your screen-name isn’t merely some sort of talisman to utilize on this board, YOU should know that an armed person should NEVER shoot back.

What are the rules of firearms?

1) Guns are alwasys loaded (even when they’re not)
2) Never point a gun at anything unless you intend to kill it (even if its unloaded).
3) having a gun is useless unless you know how to use it effectively
4) presenting a gun is useless unless you intend to use it for its putative purpose, i.e., to kill that which it is pointed at
5) always positively ID the target prior to sending the round downrange
6) ‘returning fire’ is symptomatic of a dangerous lack of situational awareness.
7) it should be habitual, i.e., reactionary-reflex w/regards to ‘hangfire’ (unless one has several unecessary eyes and skull-facets, or are otherwise impervious to affects of such and / or lead a charmed life)
8) last one who can stand wins