Brand new video out from those who really DID kill Osama:
“Mr. President, you did not kill Osama bin Laden, America did. The work that the American military has done killed Osama bin Laden. You did not,”
“As a citizen, it is my civic duty to tell the president to stop leaking information to the enemy, it will get Americans killed.”
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-Xfti7qtT0[/youtube]
Not one iota of information should of been leaked. Not the unit name, not the unit type. Not even the branch involved. I doubt even Carter or Clinton would of done this but to this narcissistic loser and his pals it’s no big deal. Eh, what if it gets people killed. ‘It still makes me look cool’
They have every right to be angry.
See author page
You can bet, if Bush had done it, he would certainly be taking credit.
We all know that Obama didn’t actually do the work—that’s trite; but he gave the order. That’s what generals and presidents do.
@Liberal1 (objectivity):
Obama gave the order? You can prove that, or do you just buy the spin put out by the Obama butt-kissing left wing media?
Tell me, how long do you think it took those SEALs to load up in two stealth helos to leave Afghanistan for the Osama raid? Do you think that operation just took a couple of hours to start executing? Did the question ever enter your little indoctrinated brain asking why Obama was on the golf course when the SEALs lifted off from Afgthanistan and had to be called back to the Situation room becuase the ObL operation had started?
And what kind of CIC plays golf while he sends American forces into harm’s way, not to mention while they are violating a sovereign nations airspace?
And how convenient that Hillary, who has become the world’s most prolific globe-hopper, just happened to be in D.C. on that VERY day.
I suggest you compare Obama’s ObL speech, with his constant referrals to himself (I, Me, My) to George Bush’s speech announcing the capture of Saddam Hussein if you want to know the difference between a stateman and a community organizer who never held a legitimate job in his life.
@Liberal1 (objectivity): SO this is all you can say? Khalid Sheikh Mohammedthe mastermind of 9-11 was captured months before it was known that we had captured him during the Bush administration. President Bush did not rush up to the microphone and announce his capture.We gathered intel from KSM that helped us roll up many terrorist networks and ultimately lead to the killing of OBL. Now ignorant people like you can only reply “You can bet, if Bush had done it, he would certainly be taking credit.” When it was announced, President didn’t have any “Is” in his speech except to mention how proud “I ” am of our military and intel services. You are as dispicable as Obama.
@Liberal1 (objectivity): Thanks for the input non-server (or coward, your words) as those of us who are serving and have served had no idea the POTUS and generals give orders…clown…..the difference is that professionals live by “quiet professionals”……armchair quarterbacks and asshats like you use it for political gain and as for GW doing the same thing Dear Leader (PBUH) has done, well you’re ignorant and a liar…when it comes to military/LE areas it would probably be best if you just STFU…
I’ve read people commenting that there is no proof that the White House has leaked anything. Talk about complete denial…
@Liberal1 (objectivity): Bush would say “we” and not “I”, and no, we have a record that he did not leak stuff that impacted OpSec, though he was pressured to by his political enemies, I’m sure.
The order to kill obl was a standing order put in place by President Bush after it was determined obl was behind the 9/11 attacks. Its highly probable that the SCOMAF had forgotten about this particular order or he just might have repealed it like he did other orders left by President Bush. Panetta made the call because as usual SCOMAF went around the room asking for consensus because for him to actually make a decision in SUPPORT of America would probably have made him physically ill. He and the most embarrassing VP in our history should however be given FULL CREDIT for killing members of Navy Seal Team 6 by breaking OPSEC. He is beyond contemptible and I pray to God this becomes his “swift boating”.
@Theresa, MSgt (Ret), USAF: You mean a swift boat over the river Stix?
@retire05: Who do you think gave the order: The Tri-Lateral Commission or some other conspiratorial group? You can draw any conclusions to want from situations—that’s what I used to do when I was young and naive—but then I grew up.
@Randy: But KSM wasn’t the leader of Al Qaida. Still calling people names, instead of reasoning, huh?
@Liberal1 (objectivity): So because KSM was not OBL, Bush didn’t announce it. Is that your story? You better get more than your sandels and tie dyed T shirt back on if you want to be taken seriously by anyone with a brain!
@Theresa, MSgt (Ret), USAF: Is that why Bush gave the order to stand down when special ops had Osama surrounded at Tora Bora? Is that why Bush gave the response on TV that he didn’t care about bin Laden?
@Nathan Blue: How do you know it impacted them—coincidence does not equal correlation. (But perhaps that’s a little too logical for you.)
@Nathan Blue: Talk about complete acceptance….
@Sua Sponte: Sorry to mention this, but you’re talking to a war vet right now.
@Randy: Call me some more names if it makes you feel better. Go ahead, let it all out. It’ll even do you more good to have a full temper tantrum. You can do it. You’re safe here, son.
Admiral William H. McRaven, the man who planned, organized, and oversaw the execution of the Osama bin Laden raid, regarding President Barack Obama.
Who are you going to believe? A four star Navy Admiral who’s the current head of U.S. Special Operations Command, or a former Navy Seal who’s currently a paid right-wing political activist and a part-time male model?
(Unfortunately, I probably know the answer to that question already.)
@Liberal1 (objectivity): BOHICAman2: I would recommend forgoing any unnecessary exercise around your dumbocrat allies. It could get quite cheeky.
@Liberal1 (objectivity): A$$breath, we all know that Valerie Jarrett wears the pants in the WH and had already nixed three go-points as well as the day prior to the final assault. Leon Panetta set up the go decision while obamination was playing golf THE 180th time.
BTW, if you look just above Admiral McRaven’s campaign ribbons in that video, you’ll notice a prominent gold badge. That’s one of the Navy’s most coveted awards: the Special Warfare insignia, also known as the Seal Trident. Admiral McRaven completed Seal Qualification Training. He was once the Commander of Seal Team 3.
Such men don’t hand out their praise lightly. They certainly don’t do it to curry favor, or for a paycheck.
@Greg: And your point is?
No, none of the people involved with the video had anything whatsoever to do with Operation Neptune’s Spear. Like the rest of us, they didn’t know a thing about it until Barack Obama suddenly appeared on a televised news bulletin to announce that Osama bin Laden was dead.
@Greg: And your point is? They obviously did not have the need to know. That is how OPSEC works for every one except Obama and his Chicago thugs!
@Randy, #21:
If you can’t figure that out for yourself, there’s no way I can explain it.
@Greg: In other words, you can not make the connection to the thread. I knew that!
My point? Oh, what the hell.
My point is that you want to replace a proven Commander in Chief–endorsed by an experienced military leader who has worked closely with him–with a tax-dodging multimillionaire who has no coherent foreign policy, and a former driver of the Oscar Mayer Wienermobile. Apparently on the say so of a paid political activist who left the Navy Seals to become an actor and a male model.
@Greg: What experience did Obama have in 2008 that qualified him as CiC? Zilch. Talk about double standards. Which military leader has endorsed him? I’m sure both will be getting endorsements from former military leaders. Proof about the tax-dodging charge with sources please. A copy of the conviction in court is preferable.
@Greg: And you believe Reid and his accusations with NO proof. Still waiting.
@Greg: Oblama is NOT a proven Commander and Chief. He is a failure.
@Greg:
Now, Greg, because I am very hesitant to call someone a liar I am going to give you ample opportunity to put forth some evidence to support the accusation that you’re putting forth against Romney.
I’m quite sure that you value your honor and integrity enough to either immediately present evidence supporting your claim or withdraw it entirely.
@Aye: Aye, your trust in the left is admirable. You even give a scorpion the opportunity to explain itself after stinging you! I think you will find that it is easier for Greg to spew accusations rather than prove it. He really struggled last night trying to connect his comments to the posted thread.
@Aye:
You owe me a new monitor. I just read your post and sprayed Coke all over it. You missed your calling as a comedian. 😉
@Aye: Good luck, I have asked Greg for proof on this for a long time and got nothing!!
@another vet, #27:
Refer to posts #17 and #20, and the video linked therein. That military leader would be 4-star Admiral William H. McRaven, Commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command and former Commander of Seal Team 3.
@Greg: Where did he endorse Obama for President? He didn’t. If he did, he would in violation of official policy prohibiting that. The individuals who are members of the particular web site in question echoed the same comments the admiral made.
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/rustman-navy-seals-leaks/2012/08/17/id/448964
@Greg:
There’s no endorsement by the Admiral in either of those posts.
You’re being dishonest again.
By the way, where’s the proof of your claim that Romney is a tax dodger?
@Aye, #30:
Mr. Romney’s most recent comment on the topic; yesterday, August 16:
In 2011, a married couple filing jointly with combined taxable income of only $17,000 would have been subject to a tax rate of 15 percent. Mr. Romney earned over $20 million in 2011 and states he paid around 13.6 percent. For a person with income that high, I don’t believe even the 2011 short or long-term capital gains rates were that low. Thus, I’m strongly inclined to believe that what most people would think of as tax dodging must have been involved.
Few people actually believe Harry Reid’s assertion that Romney paid no taxes, btw. Reid threw that over-the-top statement out to keep attention on the more legitimate questions raised by Romney’s refusal to release his returns. There’s an even more potentially damaging rumor that’s yet to surface in the mainstream media: That Romney dodged possible felony charges for failing to report overseas accounts by taking advantage of the IRS amnesty program. That strikes me as being a more likely possibility than Reid’s allegation, but it’s still nothing more than a rumor.
I find it hard to believe that Mr. Romney would have made it through the primaries if he’d announced his intention to refuse to release his returns at the very beginning. I think republican primary voters would have been far less likely to support a guy who had just painted a big question mark like that on the back of his coat.
@Aye, #36:
I was referring to the Admiral’s endorsement of Obama as a competent Commander in Chief, not to any political endorsement of Obama’s reelection efforts. That should be clear from the video. The question put to Admiral McRaven is specifically about Obama’s performance as a Commander in Chief. In his response, Admiral McRaven makes it clear that he’s not talking about political matters.
Active military leaders do not make political endorsements. Doing so is specifically forbidden by the UCMJ.
Let’s see, he ignored his general’s advice and took forever to meet with them. Yeah that sounds like a great CIC.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/general-reveals-obama-ignored-militarys-advice-afghanistan_575902.html
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/3/in-war-presidential-indecision-costs-lives/
@Greg:
If you bothered to research the tax breaks that are available to high earners, you would know that most of them were created under Democrat held Congresses, starting with Woodrow Wilson, and put on steriods by the Democrat Congresses of the FDR era. It was to offset the high taxes that Democrats wanted, but of course, they had to give a way out to their wealthy east coast supporters.
Now, perhaps you can tell me where Mitt Romney said he paid around 13% on his “adjusted gross” income. If he paid 13% of his total income, how is that much different that what Obama paid?
You see, Greg, you complain about the tax laws that were basically enacted by Democrat held Congresses, but never mention where they came from. That is blatantly dishonest on your part. And for some reason, you seem to think that Republicans, like Democrats, suffer from wealth envy. We don’t. If Mitt was smart enough to make a fortune, and managed to keep it, good on him. You progressives yack a lot about the wealthy, but oddly enough, not ONE wealthy Democrat in elected office practices what they preach and redistribute their own wealth.
@Hard Right, #39:
It’s the Commander in Chief who makes the top level calls–not the generals that a president has been given authority over. Possibly you might reverse that normal order of things if your current candidate happens to be elected.
Putting Romney in command of the U.S. military forces would be bit ironic. He has a suspected history of dodging more than taxes, I think.
@Greg:
The Hill reported that this year, 7 of the 10 wealthiest Congressmen are Democrats. Tell me, Greg, where are those clinics, health centers, day care centers, job training centers funded by those wealth Dems who believe in sharing the wealth? How many poor families have they adopted and cared for?
You see, if you claim to believe in wealth redistribution, you should start with your own.
Now, Obama, he’s a charity kind of guy. Until he ran for POTUS, he gave a whopping 1% to charity. ONE PERCENT.
So, I am waiting for you to slam all those wealthy Dems for keeping their own money, and taking all the tax breaks the Dem Congresses gave to them. I am waiting for you to rail on Obama for the lost of military lives under his watch. I am waiting on you to criticize Obama for fancy vacations (which are not much like a vacation in Crawford) and his abuse of the use of AF1.
You want to rail on Romney because he is rich and took advantage of Dem tax breaks; well buddy, unless you do the same with your own party’s members, you are just a hypocrite.
@retire05: Sadly you will be waiting a long long time. Greg never proves any outrageous statement ever. I am waiting for him to support Reid’s accusations of Romney on the floor of the Senate but all he can do is re direct the request and blame someone else. His credibility on this site is less than ZERO!!
@retire05, #42:
That’s apparently what Mitt Romney believes, judging from who would get the lion’s share of the rewards resulting from his proposal to cut everyone’s taxes by 20 percent.
@Common Sense, #43:
Refer to post #37. I don’t take Reid’s accusation literally. I never did. What I take seriously is the reason he tossed the grenade. Republicans political strategists have a big problem, and they can thank Mitt Romney for the fact that they have it. Reid made sure the issue wouldn’t get swept under the carpet. It’s not going away. Top conservative pundits made that astute observation weeks ago, when they advised Romney to release his returns and be done with it. They know a ticking time bomb when they hear one, and wisely wanted to disarm or detonate it before the republican convention. Too late now.
@Greg: You mean dodging the draft like Clinton and Biden or do those rules only apply to those with an ‘R’ after their names?
@Greg:Notice the Admiral didn’t state that Obama took out OBL like you have stated here numerous times before. Also, another video in your link (the one you didn’t highlight) has the Admiral stating that the intel leaks (the ones which you seem to downplay) are serious and could cost someone their lives. We will find out the Admiral’s true beliefs when he retires. If he had a bone to pick with Obama and stated it publicly, he would have gone the way of McCrystal. He’s smart enough not to put himself in a position of insubordination.
Both sides will have their fair share of former flag officers at their respective conventions most likely sitting in the first few rows. A few will no doubt speak on behalf of their candidate to assert what an effective CiC they are/will be. Obama will probably have the likes of Clark, Powell, and Sanchez. Romney will probably have the likes of Schwarzkopf, Franks, Grange, and Valley. Unlike 2004 where GWOT was the main issue and the economy was second, hence Bush’s win, this one will focus almost entirely on the economy. This PAC won’t have much of an impact on anyone’s opinions. It may matter to Vets and military personnel but the majority of us are going to vote against Obama no matter what. As for the rest of the voters, they will be thinking about 4 years of 8% plus unemployment, 4 years of anemic 2% or less growth, 4 years of trillion dollar plus deficits, high fuel and food prices, and stagnant wages. If the majority of them go into the voting booth on November 6th and answer ‘no’ to the question “Are you better off now than what you were 4 years ago”, someone is in deep doodoo and his name isn’t Mitt Romney.
@Greg: Have you ever heard of tax free municiple bonds? Quite a few wealth people invest in them. They invest because they are tax free and the municipality needs those investors. So again nimwit, you put you foot in your mouth!!
@Greg:
I know, Greg, that you and the Democrats favor the Marxist system of progressive taxation. Frankly, I don’t. I support a flat rate, no exemptions and you pay a percentage of your net income. But tell me, how is it not equal to give everyone the same percentage reduction?
Oh, that’s right; you only want to complain about how much the rich don’t pay, and never mention the dollar amount that they do pay. But common sense tells one that the more you make, the more you pay. I see no reason that some people should only pay 10% or 15% while others, who have worked hard enough to be successful, pay over 30%.
Let me give you an example of how wrong the Marxist (and yes, Greg, progressive taxation is a Marxist concept) is: I give you two AT&T service technicians. Both earn the same hourly wage, both have the same benefits. One works his forty hours and refuses overtime. He sits around on the weekends bar-b-quing and drinking beer while he watches ESPN and pays say the 15% rate. But now his co-worker works harder by working many hours overtime (that pays time and a half) and consequently he is bumbed up to the next tax rate. He works on weekends, and doesn’t have as much free time. Service tech #2 doesn’t get any better benefits, just actual increase in wage earnings and because he is willing to work harder, and longer, he is punished with a higher tax rate. Is it fair that his labor is punished by having to pay a higher rate?
You see, if you work hard in this country, you can make it and live a pretty good life. Some make it better but NO ONE who completes at least high school, doesn’t have a child out of wedlock and doesn’t do drugs or alcohol should ever be a “failure” unless they’re stupid and/or lazy.
Of course I have. On numerous occasions I have described in graphic detail how Obama dropped down a line from a hovering helicopter with a KA-BAR clenched between his teeth, and bested Osama bin Laden in a single combat match to the death.