The man who shot Liberty Bin Laden [Reader Post]


Every time I listen to Barack Obama describe how he repelled down a rope from a stealth helicopter on a dark Pakistani night and took down Osama Bin Laden I am reminded of the movie “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.”

Seldom has a story been more dishonestly spun than the one surrounding the death of Osama Bin Laden.

Barack Obama is celebrating the deathday of Obama Bin Laden with a party from himself. I caught a post over at Weekly Standard in which Dan Halper notes that the smirking Obama once again suggests that Mitt Romney would not have made the decision to kill Bin Laden. Obama is quoted as saying:

“I’d just recommend that everybody take a look at people’s previous statements in terms of whether they thought it was appropriate to go into Pakistan and to take out bin Laden,” Obama said, obviously taking a shot at Romney. “I assume that people meant what they said when they said it. And that’s been at least my practice. I said that I would go after bin Laden if we had a clear shot at him–and I did. If there are others who have said one thing and now suggest they would do something else, then I’d go ahead and let them explain it.”

But here’s the part that caught my eye:

“I’d just recommend that everybody take a look at people’s previous statements in terms of whether they thought it was appropriate to go into Pakistan and to take out bin Laden,”

As if going into Pakistan was his decision. Or his plan.

It wasn’t.

Going into Pakistan was George Bush’s decision, based on the advice of a CIA analyst named “John.”

While he was shepherding the hunt for bin Laden, John also was pushing to expand the Predator program, the agency’s use of unmanned airplanes to launch missiles at terrorists. The CIA largely confined those strikes to targets along Pakistan’s border with Afghanistan. But in late 2007 and early 2008, John said the CIA needed to carry out those attacks deeper inside Pakistan.

It was a risky move. Pakistan was an important but shaky ally. John’s analysts saw an increase in the number of Westerners training in Pakistani terrorist camps. John worried that those men would soon start showing up on U.S. soil.

“We’ve got to act,” John said, a former senior intelligence official recalls. “There’s no explaining inaction.”

John took the analysis to then CIA Director Michael Hayden, who agreed and took the recommendation to President George W. Bush. In the last months of the Bush administration, the CIA began striking deeper inside Pakistan.

Barack Obama adopted John’s and Bush’s plan. Then he co-opted it.

“John” persisted in the hunt for Bin Laden for a very long time. Then in 2007 a co-worker of John’s targeted “Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti.”

All the while, John’s team was working the list of bin Laden leads. In 2007, a female colleague whom the AP has also agreed not to identify decided to zero in on a man known as Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti, a nom de guerre. Other terrorists had identified al-Kuwaiti as an important courier for al-Qaida’s upper echelon, and she believed that finding him might help lead to bin Laden.

“They had their teeth clenched on this and they weren’t going to let go,” McLaughlin said of John and his team. “This was an obsession.”

It took three years, but in August 2010, al-Kuwaiti turned up on a National Security Agency wiretap. The female analyst, who had studied journalism at a Big Ten university, tapped out a memo for John, “Closing in on Bin Laden Courier,” saying her team believed al-Kuwaiti was somewhere on the outskirts of Islamabad.

The intel used to find and kill Bin Laden came from a career CIA analyst- not from Barack Obama.

John and his team had guessed correctly, taking an intellectual risk based on incomplete information. It was a gamble that ended a decade of disappointment. Later, Champagne was uncorked back at the CIA, where those in the Counterterrorism Center who had targeted bin Laden for so long celebrated. John’s team reveled in the moment.

And it has been revealed that the decision to undertake the raid was not Obama’s decision either. That belonged to Admiral William McRaven.

It’s been almost a year since President Obama’s leadership and foreign policy bona fides were allegedly established by the operation that killed Osama bin Laden. A campaign film narrated by Oscar-winning actor Tom Hanks tells of the president’s alleged solitary, agonizing decision.

With apologies to Vice President Biden, maybe President Obama doesn’t carry quite as big a stick as Joe would lead us to believe.

As reported by Big Peace, Time magazine has obtained a memo written by Leon Panetta, then-director of the Central Intelligence Agency and now-Secretary of Defense, that says “operational decision-making and control” was really in the hands of William McRaven, a three-star admiral and former Navy SEAL.

“The timing, operational decision-making and control are in Adm. McRaven’s hands,” the memo says. “The approval is provided on the risk profile presented to the president. Any additional risks are to be brought back to the president for his consideration. The direction is to go in and get bin Laden and, if he is not there, to get out.”

In other words, it was McRaven’s call to pull the trigger or not on the raid.

Now back to that Obama assertion:

President Obama’s campaign has highlighted a 2007 quote from Mitt Romney, who suggested that the fight against terrorism was bigger than bin Laden, and that it wasn’t important to “move heaven and earth” to catch him.

Curiously, back in 2009 Obama held pretty much the same position:

Obama: Killing bin Laden may not be essential

In a late Wednesday interview with CBS News, Obama signaled a more measured approach to catching the ever-elusive bin Laden, refusing to deliver any “dead or alive” ultimatums.

“I think that we have to so weaken his infrastructure that, whether he is technically alive or not, he is so pinned down that he cannot function,” Obama said.

“My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him. But if we have so tightened the noose that he’s in a cave somewhere and can’t even communicate with his operatives, then we will meet our goal of protecting America.”

It’s no stretch to assert that it was Barack Obama who in 2009 co-opted Romney’s 2007 position on the capture of Barack Obama. It is completely disingenuous for Obama to suggest otherwise because he was the beneficiary of the decisions made by George Bush and “John’s” detective work. You’d never know that by listening to Obama. Contrast the braggadocio of Obama

“I directed Leon Pannetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority”

“I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden”

“I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden”

“I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action and authorized an operation to get Usama bin Laden and bring him to justice”

“Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad Pakistan”

“I have made clear, just as President Bush did shortly after 9/11, that our war is not against Islam; bin Laden was not a Muslim leader”

to the quiet and classy reserve of George Bush describing the capture of Saddam Hussein:

The success of yesterday’s mission is a tribute to our men and women now serving in Iraq. The operation was based on the superb work of intelligence analysts who found the dictator’s footprints in a vast country. The operation was carried out with skill and precision by a brave fighting force. Our servicemen and women and our coalition allies have faced many dangers in the hunt for members of the fallen regime, and in their effort to bring hope and freedom to the Iraqi people. Their work continues, and so do the risks. Today, on behalf of the nation, I thank the members of our Armed Forces and I congratulate ’em.

Barack Obama did not decide to take the war into Pakistan. Obama did not decide to send drones deeper into Pakistan. Obama did not find Bin Laden. Obama did not pull the trigger on the raid. What you could bet your life on is that had the mission failed McRaven would have been thrown under the bus and Obama would have said “You know, this was not our plan, per se.” What Obama did do was take credit for it all.

His behavior is so offensive that he has blasted by John McCain and the SEALS. Even Arianna Huffington has called Obama’s ad “despicable.”

This morning on Fox News the CIA interrogator who over saw the CIA EIT program (and who personally briefed Nancy Pelosi) said that the interrogating Abu Zubaydah gave them a rather important piece of information- that Osama Bin Laden was communicating with the outside world through one person- the courier.

Barack Obama has called waterboarding torture and sought to prosecute those who carried out the EIT’s all the while being the beneficiary today of the information gained from those techniques.

Barack Obama is full of sh*t. He is a miserable low life.

But we can’t leave without revisiting the only truth Ted Kennedy ever uttered:


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Dr. John, thank you for putting this together to remind all of us just what a narcissist Obama is.

How different are the announcements of the two presidents. Obama’s is full of I, me, my while the only “I” coming from Bush is to congratulate the men who facilitated the capture of Saddam. And I would bet that George Bush, Jr. has no trouble driving a nail when Laura has need for one to be driven, unlike the Valerie Jarret Howdy Doody that now props his feet up on the Resolution desk.

Last weekend, while Obama was practicing his “I got Osama single handedly” speeches, GW was in Palo Duro Canyon, riding his annual bike marathon with wounded veterans. Love for our troops was not just a campaign line for Bush, it was/is real.

I guess the thing about the Osama mission that bothered me the most was the fact that Obama had to be pulled off the golf course when the SEALs were preparing to land in Abbatobad for the ObL mission. He likes to think of himself as the second coming of FDR. Can anyone in their right mind imagine FDR playing bridge and throwing down shots with his buddies while our soldiers landed on Omaha Beach?

This nation cannot withstand another four years of the first true socialist president. My God, can someone explain to me how we got to the point, as a nation, that Obama could even be elected?

NEW YORK — Mitt Romney marked the anniversary of Usama bin Laden’s death Tuesday by treating some New York City firefighters to a pizza lunch, before reiterating that he would also have made the call to strike the terror mastermind.

Meanwhile, the guy who actually did make the call was in Afghanistan, advancing policy that will bring an end to a war that’s already gone on for far too long already.

No doubt Mitt would have done that, too. Or maybe not. It all depends on who he’s talking to, and which way the wind happens to be blowing.

@Jason: Yet this is the guy who voted against the surge in Afghanistan. Now he takes credit for its success.

just on a side note regarding the title…think I would’ve went for “Usama Valance” instead of “Liberty bin Laden”…it’s just kinda message mixing confusing.

But does all this make up for the fact that George Bush, a Republican, pulled the troops back when they may have been able to capture or kill Bin Laden early in the war at Tora Bora? Instead he chose to go on to fight for oil Iraq, in the interests of his family, friends and supporters.

The Octave scale according to Obama is: Me, Me, Me, Me, Me Me Me Me !

DrJohn, great analogy! As a person who remembers “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance” (and the song by Gene Pitney), I must say that your characterization is right on target.


Do you really want to get into a flip-flopping debate? Romney has flip-flopped to be sure, but Obama? Good God. A YouTube playlist of Obama’s flip-flops would take months to complete.

It was a great contrast to compare Obama’s and Bush’s statements.
I,I,I,I,I versus success, tribute, skill, precision, brave, thank and I congratulate ‘em.
It is also worth noting Bush instituted intel-gathering means (enhanced interrogation and so-called black sites out of the country) so as to enable our brave men and women to succeed.
But on Obama’s second full day of his presidency, he banned enhanced interrogation and ordered the black sites closed.
Someone ought to ask Romney if he, had he been president in 2009, have done that.
Someone ought to ask Obama how on earth we would ever have found Osama had HIS policies been in place earlier.

Now (for what its worth) the ”White House Insider” has much to say about the day Osama went down, and the days before that.
A power struggle ensued between Clinton, Panetta, our military on one side and Obama/Jarrett dragging their feet every step on the other side.
According to this insider, Obama was taken out of the decision-loop and Panetta made the final call.
Panetta was set up to be the scapegoat had the mission failed, too.
Obama was told about it only after he could not stop it.

I kinda take offense of the use of this movie. Using the Title and pretext is perfect, but we must remember, James Stewart [a true/real war hero] detested the idea that he got to where he was living on a lie. This thing now in the WH follows Jimmy Carter not Mr. Stewart.

Objectivity? With a post like that?

Still waiting for Liberal1 to post the verification of the Bush accusation as you had requested Dr. John! Eliminating Bin Laden was good therefore it could not have been Bush who planned the action – it had to be BHO. Eliminating Hussain had to be for oil – regardless of just how little oil we ever imported for Iraq – and since it was under a republican command it had to be bad! And, why when a democrat bombs a particular location its “The right thing to do”, but when a republican does the same its always “For Oil”? Please check out Clinton’s bombing of Kosovo and the reprecussions as a consequence of that action! (I’m sure the recent fires in California were somehow Bush’s fault.)

Can anyone imagine the current occupant of the WH doing this? What a huge difference.


Whatever policy Obama is advancing in Afghanistan that will bring an end to the war that has gone on for far too long seems to have been missed by the “Tolleybon” since their bombing yesterday killed 7 and wounded many more. Guess that line of communication between President DogEater and the Tolleybon got cut.

@retire05: Reality strikes again.


I’m sure Your Man Mittens has a well-considered plan to wind down a decade-long U.S. war in Afghanistan. It probably involves speeches and airlifting several million dollars worth of pizzas. He can knock their socks off with the claim that he does his own laundry, and then explain why no one who drinks coffee can get into heaven. They’ll probably drop radical Islam and convert on the spot.


“My man Mittens”? Hardly, my man, but hey, don’t let facts get in your way. Hate to break it to you, Jaason, but where I hail from, Mitt Romney is just “liberal lite.” Guess you could say he is just another northeastern RINO who talks like a conservative (once he was no longer in office) but when in office, was as progressive/liberal as Nancy Pelosi. But even so, a RINO is better than what we have now. Hell, I would vote for roadkill to get rid of the Socialist, Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.

Found this here somewhere in the FA attic.

“the character of a man is not measured in how he handles his wins but what he does with his failures.”
– Coach Bill Courtney, Manassas Tigers


Obama hates the words “we” and “they.” If there is a way to track how many time Obama has said those words compared to “I,” I’m guessing that the “I” would win by a very large margin. You would have to exclude the times he uses the word “they” to blame.

How great was Gene Pitney ” 24 Hours From Tulsa”

The lukewarm support for Romney from FA’ers matches the frigid “endorsements” from Gingrich,Bachmann,Cain,Palin,Perry etc. Nothing yet from Santorum and Paul.
Ain’t gonna get him elected.

Richard Wheeler,
you’re not well suitable to make a comment on what you don’t have
enough knowledge of, because you don’t know what the CONSERVATIVES HAVE IN MIND,

Bees If Conservs. are strongly supporting Romney they are certainly hiding it well.
Many like Mata have said they will NOT support him.
I’m gonna wait for debates before deciding.