# Bin Laden Raid Book: First-Hand Account Of Navy SEAL Mission Will Be Released On Sept. 11



## Ravage (Aug 22, 2012)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/22/bin-laden-raid-book_n_1822628.html

NEW YORK -- A first-hand account of the Navy SEAL mission that killed Osama bin Laden is coming out Sept. 11.

Dutton announced Wednesday that Mark Owen's "No Easy Day" will "set the record straight" on the raid in Pakistan in May 2011.

"Mark Owen" is a pseudonym for the combat veteran who was one of the first fighters to enter bin Laden's third floor hideout and also witnessed his death, according to Dutton, an imprint of Penguin Group (USA). The co-author, journalist Kevin Maurer, has worked on four previous books.

One senior military official said the manuscript was not shared with special operations officials, to check for possible disclosure of classified information. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the vetting of classified information.

Seriously?


----------



## AWP (Aug 22, 2012)

Wow....and I don't mean that in a "Wow, this is awesome" sense. Is the cover of the book going to have an eagle sharpening talons while the TT burn in the background with a Trident ascending to heaven or something?


----------



## Ravage (Aug 22, 2012)

Think not this time:

http://news.lalate.com/2012/08/22/mark-owen-navy-SEAL-team-6-member-publishes-bin-laden-book/


----------



## dknob (Aug 22, 2012)

Wow. 

I'll still read it. Without a doubt.

But wow.. its one thing for Dalton Fury to write about an event that occured 7-8 years previously.

But this is way soon lol. he must have retired recently.


----------



## Ravage (Aug 22, 2012)

Understandable that since UBL was American enemy numero Uno, the thirst for any kinds of information is incredible.
Aaaaand you can bet it's gonna be an instant best seller.


----------



## Robal2pl (Aug 22, 2012)

http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.c...ook-will-describe-raid-that-killed-bin-laden/



> The author also recalls his childhood in Alaska, his grueling preparation to become a member of the SEALs and other previously unreported SEAL missions. He completed 13 combat deployments since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and retired within the last year.


----------



## AWP (Aug 22, 2012)

There's information you want to know and then there's information you should know or need to know.

So, why even bother with NDAs anymore? It is apparent that they are worthless scraps of paper. Not to beat up NSW, but the amount of media about the SEALs when compared to other SOF units...


----------



## Robal2pl (Aug 22, 2012)

Did it started with that  film and Marcinko books in early 90's?


----------



## CDG (Aug 22, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> There's information you want to know and then there's information you should know or need to know.
> 
> So, why even bother with NDAs anymore? It is apparent that they are worthless scraps of paper. Not to beat up NSW, but the amount of media about the SEALs when compared to other SOF units...


 
And it's not even media or people on the fringes.  It's dudes in the units that have done the deeds.  :-/


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 22, 2012)

So I'll address the Elephant In The Room...pragmatically, what's the difference between this guy cashing in on it (that's what it is) and Obama using it to get reelected?


----------



## Dame (Aug 22, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> So I'll address the Elephant In The Room...pragmatically, what's the difference between this guy cashing in on it (that's what it is) and Obama using it to get reelected?


Money vs Power. This guy cashes in and goes away. Obama cashes in and we all pay.


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 22, 2012)

Dame said:


> Money vs Power. This guy cashes in and goes away. Obama cashes in and we all pay.


 
What if he uses it as a springboard to politics? Ventura flexes to mind.


----------



## Dame (Aug 22, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> What if he uses it as a springboard to politics? Ventura flexes to mind.


He could, but people are now forewarned that he runs his mouth. Obama had nothing to leak until he was in power and then began to betray national trust.


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 22, 2012)

Dame said:


> He could, but people are now forewarned that he runs his mouth. Obama had nothing to leak until he was in power and then began to betray national trust.


 
Which is pretty much irrelevant because it wasn't a leak, it was a public announcement.


----------



## Dame (Aug 22, 2012)

Hmmmm. Not sure that makes it irrelevant but OK.


----------



## RackMaster (Aug 22, 2012)

I know how long the NDA I signed was and with this guy being a retired SEAL, sure as shit his was a lot longer than mine.  Charge him and any one involved in the vetting/clearance of the material used in the book.


----------



## policemedic (Aug 22, 2012)

RackMaster said:


> I know how long the NDA I signed was and with this guy being a retired SEAL, sure as shit his was a lot longer than mine. Charge him and any one involved in the vetting/clearance of the material used in the book.


 
It doesn't seem any officials vetted the material, and that's a problem.

Bottom line in my view- disclose classified information and you need to go to federal prison.

I wonder how his fellow SEALs feel about this.



SpitfireV said:


> Which is pretty much irrelevant because it wasn't a leak, it was a public announcement.


 
It may have been a public announcement, but that doesn't negate the fact that it was a breach of both national trust and national security.


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 22, 2012)

I'll agree with you re security but not trust.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 22, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> So I'll address the Elephant In The Room...pragmatically, what's the difference between this guy cashing in on it (that's what it is) and Obama using it to get reelected?


 
It's the same thing.  Oh look, the details of the Bin Laden raid get leaked just before the election.  Hm, I wonder who said that was going to happen?


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 22, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> It's the same thing. Oh look, the details of the Bin Laden raid get leaked just before the election. Hm, I wonder who said that was going to happen?


 
I think it's a long bow to draw to suggest this book is a deliberate action on the part of the White House, without evidence at least.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 22, 2012)

I never said the White House was in any way culpable, I just said it was going to happen.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 22, 2012)

Is it bad that I'm not suprised?


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 22, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I never said the White House was in any way culpable, I just said it was going to happen.


 
I must have inferred it incorrectly.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 22, 2012)

No, reading back through my post it was an easy inferrence to make, especially in light of some of my earlier posts on related topics.  I should have been clearer.  I do indeed think that the White House will leak details of the Bin Laden raid, like the video of the burial at sea... but now they may not have to.  I have no reason to believe that this particular book was a put-up job by the White House.


----------



## CDG (Aug 22, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Is it bad that I'm not suprised?


 
This is the worst part of all this shit.  It's become basically expected to either have these books coming out, or to see "said a US official/officer/attache/etc who was not authorized to discuss what he told us". People are just numb to it now.


----------



## Brill (Aug 22, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I do indeed think that the White House will leak details of the Bin Laden raid...


 
Mark Owen is a pseudonym for Obama, the author of the book, and proceeds will go towards his reelection.


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 22, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> No, reading back through my post it was an easy inferrence to make, especially in light of some of my earlier posts on related topics. I should have been clearer. I do indeed think that the White House will leak details of the Bin Laden raid, like the video of the burial at sea... but now they may not have to. I have no reason to believe that this particular book was a put-up job by the White House.


 
I think the point about the burial at sea is a good one and not one I had thought of.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 22, 2012)

I would do it if I were the President.  It would feed the interests of Americans, would be a good distractor for all of the other things that are going on, and shows the Democratic Party as strong on security, which is something they traditionally get hammered on.  I'm not certain, but I think that the Prez is actually the ultimate declassification authority, so if he wants to release something publicly (or direct it to be released) he can.


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Aug 22, 2012)

I'll just leave this here...

I do not advertise the nature of my work, nor seek recognition for my actions.​


----------



## CDG (Aug 22, 2012)

The most interesting dichotomy is the one of dudes bitching about how no one but other vets can understand, and then guys publishing books to tell all their cool stories to the people that don't understand so they can get an ego/bank account/sex life boost.


----------



## dknob (Aug 23, 2012)

So the guy was a team leader, 10 years service. Just ETSd.


----------



## Scotth (Aug 23, 2012)

I still don't understand what the WhiteHouse did that compromised national security?  The killing of OBL was going public regardless of what the WhiteHouse did.  There was helicopter wreckage in the compound, the idea that you could keep the raid secret is ridiculous.

I also find the idea that the "leaking" of the events in the raid is something new is just as ridiculous.  From Desert One the public knew just as much about that failed event as we do about the raid on Osama.  The same could be said about every other major conflict from Greanda, Panama, Desert Storm, Somolia etc we knew about Delta the Dev group etc.


----------



## Isiah6:8 (Aug 23, 2012)

Wonder if we will see MB's name as a "special advisor" in the zero dark thirty credits. Don't know why they attempt a pen name, works well for about two minutes seeing his name is out already.


----------



## Ravage (Aug 23, 2012)

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...insider-account-idd-could-face-legal-trouble/

The author of a recently announced insider account of the raid that killed Usama bin Laden has been identified to Fox News as a 36-year-old former Navy SEAL Team 6 member from Alaska who also played a role in the high-profile rescue of an American captain kidnapped by Somali pirates.

The book, "No Easy Day: The Firsthand Account of the Mission That Killed Osama Bin Laden," is set to hit shelves on Sept 11. It is penned under the pseudonym "Mark Owen," according to the publisher, but multiple sources told Fox News his name is in fact Matt Bissonnette, 36, of Wrangell, Alaska.

Bissonnette could be exposing himself to legal trouble, as the Pentagon has not vetted the account.

The tell-all book also has apparently upset a large population of former and current SEAL members who worry about releasing information that could compromise future missions. One Navy SEAL told Fox News, "How do we tell our guys to stay quiet when this guy won't?" Other SEALs are expressing anger, with some going so far as to call him a "traitor." 

According to a press release from his publisher, Penguin Group, "Owen (Bissonnette) was one of the first men through the door on the third floor of the terrorist leader's hideout and was present at his death."

In the book, Bissonnette writes "it is time to set the record straight about one of the most important missions in U.S. military history."

An experienced member of the elite Navy SEAL special operators, Bissonnette also participated in the highly publicized rescue of Captain Richard Phillips in the Indian Ocean in 2009. That mission involved a daring rescue that ended when SEAL snipers shot and killed three Somali pirates with direct shots to the head.

Bissonnette received the rank of chief before he retired.

The book is co-authored with Kevin Maurer, author of four books, many of which were based on Special Operations.

Along with using the pseudonym "Mark Owen," Bissonette protected his fellow SEAL Team 6 members by changing their names in the book.

Both the Pentagon and CIA said Wednesday that the book was not in any way vetted by either department to prevent unwanted classified information from being released. When asked about the book, officials in both departments said they were unaware of the SEAL's true identity, but described co-author Kevin Maurer as a well-respected journalist.

Lt. Cmdr. Chris Servello, a Navy spokesman, said it's possible Bissonnette or any former service member could be punished for revealing national security secrets. "Any service member who discloses classified or sensitive information could be subject to prosecution -- this doesn't end when you leave the service," Servello said. "There is nothing unique to the special warfare community in this regard."

Meanwhile, the Pentagon said that because the author is a retired service member, any potential criminal prosecution would be handled by the Department of Justice.

A spokesman at Dutton, a division of Penguin Group, said proceeds from the book will be donated to charitable causes that benefit the families of fallen Navy SEALs.

Much attention has been given to the issue of security leaks in the ongoing presidential race.  Supporters of Mitt Romney accuse President Obama of intentionally leaking operational details surrounding the bin Laden raid for political gain.  

OPSEC, a group of retired military and intelligence officers, came under fire this week from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Martin Dempsey, who told Fox News on Tuesday he was "disappointed" by the group's political use of the military uniform in a recent anti-Obama advertisement. Dempsey said he feels those who serve ought to remain "apolitical."

OPSEC fired back, arguing that Dempsey's criticisms can be applied equally to the Obama campaign's "One Chance" ad, which featured images of Blackhawk helicopters in flight and military pilots. The video suggests Romney would not have made the same decision to call for the raid that killed Usama bin Laden.  

Film producer Kathryn Bigelow received help from the White House when she produced "Zero Dark Thirty," a highly anticipated film detailing the bin Laden raid that was originally set to be released before the November election but was pushed to a later date after Republicans cried foul.

This just got a whole lot interesting.


----------



## CDG (Aug 23, 2012)

Not surprising.  Dalton Fury didn't hold up for long, this guy had to expect that his pseudonym wouldn't either.


----------



## AWP (Aug 23, 2012)

CDG said:


> Not surprising. Dalton Fury didn't hold up for long, this guy had to expect that his pseudonym wouldn't either.


 
It appears he didn't learn anything from that episode.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 23, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> It appears he didn't learn anything from that episode.


 
I think he did.  He learned that fame and fortune will be his if he sells out, because there are no consequences for this type of betrayal.  Ever.  Well, other than getting PNG'd from the unit, but that doesn't really seem to be a concern for any of these types of people.  "Hm, the Army guys are all doing it, and nothing ever happens to them, and my story is a MUCH better moneymaker."


----------



## policemedic (Aug 23, 2012)

Scotth said:


> I still don't understand what the WhiteHouse did that compromised national security? The killing of OBL was going public regardless of what the WhiteHouse did. There was helicopter wreckage in the compound, the idea that you could keep the raid secret is ridiculous.


 
I agree the story was going to come out and the USG was going to take credit.  But the announcement should have come later, after we'd had a chance to exploit the intel.  Most importantly, "SEAL Team Six" should have been replaced by "agents of the United States Government".  I know the term agent is controversial, but it is applicable in this circumstance.  No one needed to know DEVGRU had done it.  The list of likely units isn't long, but let the enemy figure it out.  Why immediately put them on the trail of every member of DEVGRU and their families?



Scotth said:


> I also find the idea that the "leaking" of the events in the raid is something new is just as ridiculous. From Desert One the public knew just as much about that failed event as we do about the raid on Osama. The same could be said about every other major conflict from Greanda, Panama, Desert Storm, Somolia etc we knew about Delta the Dev group etc.


 
True.  But does that mean that because one guy did a stupid thing, someone else gets carte blanche for doing it?


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 23, 2012)

Can we say "persona non grata" boys and girls?


----------



## TheSiatonist (Aug 23, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I think he did. He learned that fame and fortune will be his if he sells out, because there are no consequences for this type of betrayal. Ever. Well, other than getting PNG'd from the unit, but that doesn't really seem to be a concern for any of these types of people. "Hm, the Army guys are all doing it, and nothing ever happens to them, and my story is a MUCH better moneymaker."


My thoughts, too, when Marcinko's book first came out.


----------



## pardus (Aug 24, 2012)

The guy is a sell out POS. He didn't get this approved? Fucking seriously?
I'm glad his name is out in the public domain. I wonder if he considered the consequences to his unit, family, country etc... or just the money and fame?

Fuck him.


----------



## Crusader74 (Aug 24, 2012)

Money talks...That's what this boils down to.  This guy will make a small fortune  and then open up a ultra high speed shooting academy or "consult" for war movies..

If he betrayed his Team mates and possibly put them in harms way by revealing TTP's for monetary gain, well I believe Karma's a bitch...


----------



## Centermass (Aug 24, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I'm not certain, but I think that the Prez is actually the ultimate declassification authority, so if he wants to release something publicly (or direct it to be released) he can.


 
You would be correct.

http://www.shadowspear.com/vb/posts/230808/


----------



## Scotth (Aug 24, 2012)

policemedic said:


> I agree the story was going to come out and the USG was going to take credit. But the announcement should have come later, after we'd had a chance to exploit the intel. Most importantly, "SEAL Team Six" should have been replaced by "agents of the United States Government". I know the term agent is controversial, but it is applicable in this circumstance. No one needed to know DEVGRU had done it. The list of likely units isn't long, but let the enemy figure it out. Why immediately put them on the trail of every member of DEVGRU and their families?
> 
> True. But does that mean that because one guy did a stupid thing, someone else gets carte blanche for doing it?


 
I agree with your second point to a certain extent.  Yes one wrong doesn't make it right for another guy but it goes to the credibility of the people attacking one set of action.  For example another one of the big criticism of Obama is he took to much credit and celebrated to much.  All kinds of Republicans have made that attack from Boehner on down.  Boehner was around when Bush did a tail hook landing on an aircraft carrier comes strutting out for a photo op in his flight suit and gives a speech in front of a big mission complete banner.  Did anyone accuse Bush of taking to much credit?  Did anyone think Bush was trying to say he was the one that captured Iraq all by himself.  Did anyone on the right stand up and say made that was a little to much.

It's not about it being Bush's fault but it's about a double standard.  When your guy does it nothing gets said when the other guys does it, even if its not as bad, NOW we have a problem.  That is what drives me nuts.

As far as your first point I understand your point we just probably disagree on it.  Personally I believe that story was going public in a matter of hours regardless of what the WhiteHouse did.  We couldn't deny it because there was a crashed helicopter in the compound and everyone was going to know exactly what happened.   I wasn't there and I don't know the intel but my gut says there probably wasn't much that could have been taken advantage of in the next couple hours before that story became public.


----------



## moobob (Aug 24, 2012)

Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.

In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty, and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment — yet it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage — your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other — made this day possible. Because of you, our nation is more secure. Because of you, the tyrant has fallen, and Iraq is free.

Operation Iraqi Freedom was carried out with a combination of precision, and speed, and boldness the enemy did not expect, and the world had not seen before. From distant bases or ships at sea, we sent planes and missiles that could destroy an enemy division, or strike a single bunker. Marines and soldiers charged to Baghdad across 350 miles of hostile ground, in one of the swiftest advances of heavy arms in history. You have shown the world the skill and the might of the American Armed Forces.

This nation thanks all of the members of our coalition who joined in a noble cause. We thank the Armed Forces of the United Kingdom, Australia, and Poland, who shared in the hardships of war. We thank all of the citizens of Iraq who welcomed our troops and joined in the liberation of their own country. And tonight, I have a special word for Secretary (Donald) Rumsfeld, for General (Tommy) Franks, and for all the men and women who wear the uniform of the United States: America is grateful for a job well done.

The character of our military through history — the daring of Normandy, the fierce courage of Iwo Jima, the decency and idealism that turned enemies into allies — is fully present in this generation. When Iraqi civilians looked into the faces of our servicemen and women, they saw strength, and kindness, and good will. When I look at the members of the United States military, I see the best of our country, and I am honored to be your commander in chief.

In the images of fallen statues, we have witnessed the arrival of a new era. For a hundred years of war, culminating in the nuclear age, military technology was designed and deployed to inflict casualties on an ever-growing scale. In defeating Nazi Germany and imperial Japan, Allied Forces destroyed entire cities, while enemy leaders who started the conflict were safe until the final days. Military power was used to end a regime by breaking a nation. Today, we have the greater power to free a nation by breaking a dangerous and aggressive regime. With new tactics and precision weapons, we can achieve military objectives without directing violence against civilians. No device of man can remove the tragedy from war. Yet it is a great advance when the guilty have far more to fear from war than the innocent.

In the images of celebrating Iraqis, we have also seen the ageless appeal of human freedom. Decades of lies and intimidation could not make the Iraqi people love their oppressors or desire their own enslavement. Men and women in every culture need liberty like they need food, and water, and air. Everywhere that freedom arrives, humanity rejoices. And everywhere that freedom stirs, let tyrants fear.

We have difficult work to do in Iraq. We are bringing order to parts of that country that remain dangerous. We are pursuing and finding leaders of the old regime, who will be held to account for their crimes. We have begun the search for hidden chemical and biological weapons, and already know of hundreds of sites that will be investigated. We are helping to rebuild Iraq, where the dictator built palaces for himself, instead of hospitals and schools. And we will stand with the new leaders of Iraq as they establish a government of, by, and for the Iraqi people. The transition from dictatorship to democracy will take time, but it is worth every effort. Our coalition will stay until our work is done. And then we will leave — and we will leave behind a free Iraq.

The Battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11th, 2001, and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men — the shock troops of a hateful ideology — gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the "beginning of the end of America." By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve, and force our retreat from the world. They have failed.

In the Battle of Afghanistan, we destroyed the Taliban, many terrorists, and the camps where they trained. We continue to help the Afghan people lay roads, restore hospitals, and educate all of their children. Yet we also have dangerous work to complete. As I speak, a special operations task force, led by the 82nd Airborne, is on the trail of the terrorists, and those who seek to undermine the free government of Afghanistan. America and our coalition will finish what we have begun.

From Pakistan to the Philippines to the Horn of Africa, we are hunting down al-Qaida killers. Nineteen months ago, I pledged that the terrorists would not escape the patient justice of the United States. And as of tonight, nearly one-half of al-Qaida's senior operatives have been captured or killed.

The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We have removed an ally of al-Qaida, and cut off a source of terrorist funding. And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more.

In these 19 months that changed the world, our actions have been focused, and deliberate, and proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of September the 11th — the last phone calls, the cold murder of children, the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States. And war is what they got.

Our war against terror is proceeding according to principles that I have made clear to all:

Any person involved in committing or planning terrorist attacks against the American people becomes an enemy of this country, and a target of American justice.

Any person, organization, or government that supports, protects, or harbors terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent, and equally guilty of terrorist crimes.

Any outlaw regime that has ties to terrorist groups, and seeks or possesses weapons of mass destruction, is a grave danger to the civilized world, and will be confronted.

And anyone in the world, including the Arab world, who works and sacrifices for freedom has a loyal friend in the United States of America.

Our commitment to liberty is America's tradition — declared at our founding, affirmed in Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms, asserted in the Truman Doctrine, and in Ronald Reagan's challenge to an evil empire. We are committed to freedom in Afghanistan, in Iraq, and in a peaceful Palestine. The advance of freedom is the surest strategy to undermine the appeal of terror in the world. Where freedom takes hold, hatred gives way to hope. When freedom takes hold, men and women turn to the peaceful pursuit of a better life. American values, and American interests, lead in the same direction: We stand for human liberty.

The United States upholds these principles of security and freedom in many ways — with all the tools of diplomacy, law enforcement, intelligence, and finance. We are working with a broad coalition of nations that understand the threat, and our shared responsibility to meet it. The use of force has been, and remains, our last resort. Yet all can know, friend and foe alike, that our nation has a mission: We will answer threats to our security, and we will defend the peace.

Our mission continues. Al-Qaida is wounded, not destroyed. The scattered cells of the terrorist network still operate in many nations, and we know from daily intelligence that they continue to plot against free people. The proliferation of deadly weapons remains a serious danger. The enemies of freedom are not idle, and neither are we. Our government has taken unprecedented measures to defend the homeland — and we will continue to hunt down the enemy before he can strike.

The war on terror is not over, yet it is not endless. We do not know the day of final victory, but we have seen the turning of the tide. No act of the terrorists will change our purpose, or weaken our resolve, or alter their fate. Their cause is lost. Free nations will press on to victory.

Other nations in history have fought in foreign lands and remained to occupy and exploit. Americans, following a battle, want nothing more than to return home. And that is your direction tonight. After service in the Afghan and Iraqi theaters of war — after 100,000 miles, on the longest carrier deployment in recent history — you are homeward bound. Some of you will see new family members for the first time — 150 babies were born while their fathers were on the Lincoln. Your families are proud of you, and your nation will welcome you.

We are mindful as well that some good men and women are not making the journey home. One of those who fell, Corporal Jason Mileo, spoke to his parents five days before his death. Jason's father said, "He called us from the center of Baghdad, not to brag, but to tell us he loved us. Our son was a soldier." Every name, every life, is a loss to our military, to our nation, and to the loved ones who grieve. There is no homecoming for these families. Yet we pray, in God's time, their reunion will come.

Those we lost were last seen on duty. Their final act on this earth was to fight a great evil, and bring liberty to others. All of you — all in this generation of our military — have taken up the highest calling of history. You are defending your country, and protecting the innocent from harm. And wherever you go, you carry a message of hope — a message that is ancient, and ever new. In the words of the prophet Isaiah: "To the captives, 'Come out!' and to those in darkness, 'Be free!"'

Thank you for serving our country and our cause. May God bless you all, and may God continue to bless America.

President George W. Bush


----------



## moobob (Aug 24, 2012)

Good evening. Tonight, I can report to the American people and to the world, the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda, and a terrorist who's responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

It was nearly 10 years ago that a bright September day was darkened by the worst attack on the American people in our history. The images of 9/11 are seared into our national memory -- hijacked planes cutting through a cloudless September sky; the Twin Towers collapsing to the ground; black smoke billowing up from the Pentagon; the wreckage of Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where the actions of heroic citizens saved even more heartbreak and destruction.
And yet we know that the worst images are those that were unseen to the world. The empty seat at the dinner table. Children who were forced to grow up without their mother or their father. Parents who would never know the feeling of their child's embrace. Nearly 3,000 citizens taken from us, leaving a gaping hole in our hearts.
On September 11, 2001, in our time of grief, the American people came together. We offered our neighbors a hand, and we offered the wounded our blood. We reaffirmed our ties to each other, and our love of community and country. On that day, no matter where we came from, what God we prayed to, or what race or ethnicity we were, we were united as one American family.
We were also united in our resolve to protect our nation and to bring those who committed this vicious attack to justice. We quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda -- an organization headed by Osama bin Laden, which had openly declared war on the United States and was committed to killing innocents in our country and around the globe. And so we went to war against al Qaeda to protect our citizens, our friends, and our allies.

Over the last 10 years, thanks to the tireless and heroic work of our military and our counterterrorism professionals, we've made great strides in that effort. We've disrupted terrorist attacks and strengthened our homeland defense. In Afghanistan, we removed the Taliban government, which had given bin Laden and al Qaeda safe haven and support. And around the globe, we worked with our friends and allies to capture or kill scores of al Qaeda terrorists, including several who were a part of the 9/11 plot.

Yet Osama bin Laden avoided capture and escaped across the Afghan border into Pakistan. Meanwhile, al Qaeda continued to operate from along that border and operate through its affiliates across the world.

_*And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.*_
_*Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.*_
_*Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.*_ A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.

For over two decades, bin Laden has been al Qaeda's leader and symbol, and has continued to plot attacks against our country and our friends and allies. The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date in our nation's effort to defeat al Qaeda.
Yet his death does not mark the end of our effort. There's no doubt that al Qaeda will continue to pursue attacks against us. We must --- and we will -- remain vigilant at home and abroad.

As we do, we must also reaffirm that the United States is not --- and never will be --- at war with Islam. I've 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; he was a mass murderer of Muslims. Indeed, al Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own. So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.

Over the years, I've repeatedly made clear that we would take action within Pakistan if we knew where bin Laden was. That is what we've done. But it's important to note that our counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding. Indeed, bin Laden had declared war against Pakistan as well, and ordered attacks against the Pakistani people.
Tonight, I called President Zardari, and my team has also spoken with their Pakistani counterparts. They agree that this is a good and historic day for both of our nations. And going forward, it is essential that Pakistan continue to join us in the fight against al Qaeda and its affiliates.
The American people did not choose this fight. It came to our shores, and started with the senseless slaughter of our citizens. After nearly 10 years of service, struggle, and sacrifice, we know well the costs of war. These efforts weigh on me every time I, as commander in chief, have to sign a letter to a family that has lost a loved one, or look into the eyes of a service member who's been gravely wounded.
So Americans understand the costs of war. Yet as a country, we will never tolerate our security being threatened, nor stand idly by when our people have been killed. We will be relentless in defense of our citizens and our friends and allies. We will be true to the values that make us who we are. And on nights like this one, we can say to those families who have lost loved ones to al Qaeda's terror: Justice has been done.
Tonight, we give thanks to the countless intelligence and counterterrorism professionals who've worked tirelessly to achieve this outcome. The American people do not see their work, nor know their names. But tonight, they feel the satisfaction of their work and the result of their pursuit of justice.

We give thanks for the men who carried out this operation, for they exemplify the professionalism, patriotism, and unparalleled courage of those who serve our country. And they are part of a generation that has borne the heaviest share of the burden since that September day.
Finally, let me say to the families who lost loved ones on 9/11 that we have never forgotten your loss, nor wavered in our commitment to see that we do whatever it takes to prevent another attack on our shores.

And tonight, let us think back to the sense of unity that prevailed on 9/11. I know that it has, at times, frayed. Yet today's achievement is a testament to the greatness of our country and the determination of the American people.
The cause of securing our country is not complete. But tonight, we are once again reminded that America can do whatever we set our mind to. That is the story of our history, whether it's the pursuit of prosperity for our people, or the struggle for equality for all our citizens; our commitment to stand up for our values abroad, and our sacrifices to make the world a safer place.
Let us remember that we can do these things not just because of wealth or power, but because of who we are: one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Thank you. May God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.

President Barack H. Obama


----------



## moobob (Aug 24, 2012)

President Bush makes no mention of himself. Maybe Obama's speech writers are just pretentious douchebags?

His speech was written like it was for a reason... a political reason.


----------



## Scotth (Aug 24, 2012)

moobob said:


> President Bush makes no mention of himself. Maybe Obama's speech writers are just pretentious douchebags?
> 
> His speech was written like it was for a reason... a political reason.


 
Because the whole spectacle of the prelanding coverage and Bush walking out onto the flight deck of a carrier in a flight suit and making the speech on a carrier instead of the White House didn't say "look at me".  It could have been a much different situation if he flew to the carrier on Marine1, got off the helicopter in his normal business and gave his speech.  Both events are more then just the words in the speech.


----------



## Grimfury160 (Aug 24, 2012)

policemedic said:


> It doesn't seem any officials vetted the material, and that's a problem.
> 
> Bottom line in my view- disclose classified information and you need to go to federal prison.
> 
> ...


 
The fact that he violated the NDA and spoke out, leaves not only him open but his team members. He can't beat the radar on this one.
I have a feeling that because of the importance of his actions in GWOT he will get a slap on the face and dissapear quietly under Federal Witness Protection.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 24, 2012)

It should be noted that the "mission accomplished" banner was not for bush, but rather the sailors on board had had it up as they were on their return voyage from the area of conflict, celibrating that they had accomplished their mission, which they did. Obviously perception is reality, and bush & co. should have said "wait a sec, this might look kind of bad to some people with the prez standing in front of it"...which it did. But, I truly do believe that it wasn't Bush being vain on purpose, but rather a lack of attention to detail.

Either way, I don't think that that situation is comparable to the UBL raid. A more accurate comparison would be the capture of Saddaam, or the killing of AMZ. To this day, most folks on the street would be unable to answer "who got saddaam" or "who killed AMZ"...hell most probably don't even know who AMZ is. But I don't think there is a single soul on American soil that couldn't answer "who got UBL".

As far as the book goes, I think the reason we see alot more SEALs in the media is that it is a way different culture than other SOF units. Anyone who has worked with them before (I have on two of my five trips) can see the difference in culture. I'm sure there are many members on this board that can back me up on that. I can only speak of the Ranger attitude, but within the Regiment OPSEC is upheld to an almost draconian standard. To this day, I get a guilty feeling just talking about some of the threads that we have on this forum. I'm not saying that that is necessarily right, but you can also point to the fact that there are VERY few Ranger books out there. Honestly, I think most people don't really give a shit about the 75th b/c they never hear about us, and assume we don't do anything besides walk around in the woods with ropes slung across us. You can point to the same with AFSOC, very few books about those guys. Again, I don't think most people even know about them. SF has had quite a few books written, but I would say the majority are not authored by an SF soldier himself, rather the books are written about them, with a few exceptions. But, you can definately tell the difference in culture when working with AFSOC or SF, or other SOF units, as opposed to working with SEALS/DEVGRU.

I know for a fact that not all SEALs are the book publishing types, and I'm not trying to mass stereotype here, but I don't think many folks who have worked with them before are ever suprised when they see a SEAL in the headlines or on the book shelf.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 24, 2012)

> dissapear quietly under Federal Witness Protection.


 
WITPRO? Really dude?

I agree that he will probably face little punishment if any at all, but I highly doubt he would be placed under witness protection, that doesn't even make sense.


----------



## Centermass (Aug 24, 2012)

​And on top of everything else, pay particular attention to the very last line. 



> Special operations chief Adm. Bill McRaven warned his troops, current and former, that he would take legal action against anyone found to have exposed sensitive information that could cause fellow forces harm.We will pursue every option available to hold members accountable, including criminal prosecution where appropriate," the four-star commander wrote, in an open, unclassified letter emailed to the active-duty special operations community Thursday, and obtained by The Associated Press.
> 
> The warning came a day after a retired Navy commando revealed he is publishing a first-hand account of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden. Pentagon officials say they have not been given a chance to review the book. It also follows a media campaign by special operations veterans, decrying alleged leaks by President Barack Obama's administration of secret operations, and criticizing Obama's highlighting the raid as part of his reelection campaign. McRaven also took former special operators to task for "using their 'celebrity' status to advance their personal or professional agendas."
> 
> ...


​


----------



## JBS (Aug 24, 2012)

What a massive, embarrassing clusterfuck.

I've seen places on the internet where the guy's address and phone number were already posted- although I don't know the accuracy of it. The comments alongside it are basically egging on Al Qaeda to pay him a visit (frome extreme Leftist anti-military types). And while I doubt he *personally* has any kind of fear of that kind of thing about himself, the stress is the family. Can you watch your family with your head on a swivel 24/7 for the next 2 decades? I doubt it. Can the other men in that unit now accept that new reality as well? In the back of your mind- way deep down in there- every barbecue, every funny looking cab driver, every lost driver passing through your neighborhood while your kids play in the back yard- I can just imagine the paranoia factor will peek out every so often. Basically the hero of half a billion fanatics was wasted by you and your team, and now your identity is known. I'd say it is perfectly reasonable to be concerned.

Persec has fallen by the wayside for a long time now because there hasn't really been an attack or kidnapping or targeted murder of a US service-person, but the first time it happens, assholes are going to pucker, and we're going to remember in this country what the point of persec used to be. I'm embarrassed of how this has marred the integrity of the Naval Service.


----------



## Grimfury160 (Aug 24, 2012)




----------



## pardus (Aug 24, 2012)

This is not about Obama or Bush.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 24, 2012)

I don't think he is in any danger at all, which is probably one of the reasons people like him write books like this with such impunity.  Have there been any targeted attacks against any SOF servicemembers inside the US since... well, ever?  I can't think of any.  And I think people like McRaven and McChrystal would be more lucrative targets than the "shooters."


----------



## JBS (Aug 24, 2012)

There have been targeted attacks against VIP's, General Officers, etc., with rocket attacks, mortars, sniper fire (even at VIP aircraft on the tarmac in a few cases) and there have been attacks against service-members at something just shy of random, but I do agree there haven't been any blatant targeted attacks against SOF members.

But this situation seems different, sir, in the sense that here we have the name & address of one of the guys who killed the most famous Islamic radical in modern history. If coordinated retaliation is not likely, if anything it is because our forces have substantially attrited those with genuine capabilities of attacking, not because there won't be a desire for retaliation.   Even so, there's always the chance of a Pim Fortuyn or a Salman Rushdie declaration, or a Geert Wilders open "contract" on the guy.  In my opinon, this is sort of uncharted waters with the nature of Bin Laden being so high profile.  

My 2c.


----------



## pardus (Aug 24, 2012)

JBS said:


> There have been targeted attacks against VIP's, General Officers, etc., with rocket attacks, mortars, sniper fire (even at VIP aircraft on the tarmac in a few cases) and there have been attacks against service-members at something just shy of random,


 
In the US?


----------



## JBS (Aug 24, 2012)

pardus said:


> In the US?


Ah, that is a critical detail- and no. I neglected that in Mara's post. The incidents I mentioned regarding VIPs and General Officers were all overseas, not CONUS.

Specifically* within the US* there have been a few cases where service members have been targeted by shooters- including recruiting stations, an instance where military members were seated in a restaurant and were targeted because they were wearing camouflage utilities, and perhaps one might even add the Ft. Hood incident to that list.


----------



## pardus (Aug 24, 2012)

Roger.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 24, 2012)

JBS said:


> Ah, that is a critical detail- and no. I neglected that in Mara's post. The incidents I mentioned regarding VIPs and General Officers were all overseas, not CONUS.
> 
> Specifically* within the US* there have been a few cases where service members have been targeted by shooters- including recruiting stations, an instance where military members were seated in a restaurant and were targeted because they were wearing camouflage utilities, and perhaps one might even add the Ft. Hood incident to that list.


 
Absolutely there have been attacks against Servicemembers CONUS.  But they were all RANDOM attacks, nothing specific AFAIK.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 24, 2012)

Word on the street: Not a good week to be in NSW.... apparently the hammer is coming down, and hard, on those guys.


----------



## Ravage (Aug 24, 2012)

There is also news that the book release has been shifted to October - not confirmed yet.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 24, 2012)

apparently he is a pretty artistic individual as well.....

http://www.matthewbissonnette.com/


----------



## Ravage (Aug 24, 2012)

You sure thats him?


----------



## Ravage (Aug 24, 2012)

Sep 9th 60 mionutes will show an interview with the books author:


----------



## Centermass (Aug 24, 2012)

goon175 said:


> apparently he is a pretty artistic individual as well.....
> 
> http://www.matthewbissonnette.com/


 
Pretty sure this one's a hockey player from that place up north.......


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 24, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Word on the street: Not a good week to be in NSW.... apparently the hammer is coming down, and hard, on those guys.


 
On which guys?  The only people that anyone would have the guts to go after (i.e. the ones still on active duty) haven't done anything wrong, AFAIK.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 24, 2012)

yeah, the active duty guys.


----------



## AWP (Aug 24, 2012)

Ravage said:


> There is also news that the book release has been shifted to October - not confirmed yet.


 
Closer to election day is good, adds a little more color and a few more clowns to this circus.


----------



## Ravage (Aug 24, 2012)

Some time ago a book written by a former CIA guy/goverment contractor was taken off the shelfs, and sensitive stuff was taken out. Maybe it will work in this case also.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 24, 2012)

I just want to point out an interesting public relations irony.  A couple weeks ago you have the viral video of "special operators telling the President to zip it" (yes, i'm using the media tag line).  And now this book by a former member of NSW. 

Couple this with the Act Of Valor movie and the irony just sort of slaps you in the face right?

And no, I won't be purchasing or reading this book.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 24, 2012)

I have a backlog of books right now, but eventually I will probably want to see what all the hype is about.


----------



## Red Ryder (Aug 24, 2012)

Seems fitting-


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 24, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> Absolutely there have been attacks against Servicemembers CONUS. But they were all RANDOM attacks, nothing specific AFAIK.


 
IIRC the Captain of the ship that shot down the Iranian airliner was killed by the Iranians, but that was back in the 80s.


----------



## CDG (Aug 24, 2012)

ADM McRaven tells troops to "pipe down": http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2012/08/23/2072240/seal-who-wrote-bin-laden-raid.html

It'll be interesting to see if there are any actual legal consequences, or if it's just tough talk for the media.


----------



## AWP (Aug 24, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> IIRC the Captain of the ship that shot down the Iranian airliner was killed by the Iranians, but that was back in the 80s.


 
No, he's alive and well. A pipe bomb was attached to his minivan and detonated, but his wife was driving and she was unharmed.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 24, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> IIRC the Captain of the ship that shot down the Iranian airliner was killed by the Iranians, but that was back in the 80s.


 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_C._Rogers_III


----------



## JBS (Aug 25, 2012)

*Al Qaeda Threats Against Outed Navy SEAL Begin:*


> http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_new...navy-SEAL-turned-author-with-destruction?lite
> 
> Users on several militant Islamic websites affiliated with al-Qaida have posted the name and photo of a former Navy SEAL identified as the author of an upcoming book on the commando raid that killed Osama bin Laden. The posts called for his "destruction" in revenge for the al-Qaida founder’s killing.
> 
> ...


 


> http://news.yahoo.com/ex-navy-SEAL-behind-bin-laden-book-faces-013612266.html
> 
> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The former U.S. Navy SEAL who authored a soon-to-be-published book about the raid that killed Osama bin Laden is now facing threats against his life in addition to possible criminal prosecution.
> An official al Qaeda website on Friday posted a photograph and the name of the former Navy commando responsible for the book, calling him "the dog who murdered the martyr Sheikh Osama bin Laden."





> By early on Friday, the man's name, photograph and age had been posted on the "the Al-Fidaa Islamic Network" online forum, one of two websites officially endorsed by al Qaeda, according to Evan Kohlmann, founder of the New York-based security firm Flashpoint Global Partners.
> 
> It was followed by comments that called for the man's death, including one response that said, "O' Allah, kill every one of them," and another that said, "O' Allah, make an example of him for the whole world and give him dark days ahead."


----------



## JBS (Aug 25, 2012)

Someone tell me again why FOX News outed this guy?


----------



## goon175 (Aug 25, 2012)

If it wasn't fox news, it would have been someone else. Let's get real, this guys name wasn't going to remain hidden forever. Remember dalton fury? yeah, that lasted real long. When you piss off everyone in your former unit, they aren't going to let you hide behind a pseudonym.


----------



## JBS (Aug 25, 2012)

I can see that.  I still think it was irresponsible but I can see your point that it was inevitable.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 25, 2012)

Irresponsible, yes, I totally agree.


----------



## pardus (Aug 25, 2012)

Fuck him, he outed himself.


----------



## AWP (Aug 25, 2012)

If he didn't want to be outed then he shouldn't have written the book. This is on him.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 25, 2012)

JBS said:


> Someone tell me again why FOX News outed this guy?


 
Why not?

AQ makes LOTS of threats against LOTS of people. That doesn't mean they're credible. At the same time, I'll say it if no one else will: the author brought this on himself. There is no way his name was not going to be found out-quickly- and this was a predictable and UTTERLY PREVENTABLE result of his own greed.

This just means he's going to be able to secure another book deal, "My Life After Bin Laden," with completely invented stories of how he's fighting off AQ here in the US.

ETA:  Besides, everyone knows that President Obama is the "one who got Osama," the guy who wrote the book has nothing to worry about ;)


----------



## Centermass (Aug 25, 2012)

Just as a matter of record here, he didn't kill OBL.

The guy that actually did it was with me last night, belly up to a bar with all these chicks hanging on him buying him drinks. :-"


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 25, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> No, he's alive and well. A pipe bomb was attached to his minivan and detonated, but his wife was driving and she was unharmed.





Marauder06 said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_C._Rogers_III


 
Ah thank you gentlemen.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 25, 2012)

Bait.  *If* AQ is in America, and *if* AQ would devote time, energy and resources to killing a SEAL or his family, is that not better than having AQ devote that time, energy and resources to killing those the SEAL is charged with defending?  “Special” is Ops, not person.


----------



## Centermass (Aug 25, 2012)

Desperado said:


> Bait. *If* AQ is in America, and *if* AQ would devote time, energy and resources to killing a SEAL or his family, is that not better than having AQ devote that time, energy and resources to killing those the SEAL is charged with defending? “Special” is Ops, not person.


 

Ok. Now *I'm* confused. *I* read it several times and still don't understand it. Maybe *I* need another drink.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 25, 2012)

Centermass said:


> Ok. Now I'm confused. I read it several times and still don't understand it. Maybe I need another drink.


I wrote a somewhat long post and then tried to synthesize it down to a nut.  I'm trying hard to be laconic.  Apparently I failed and need much more work.  My apologies.  I still have the long post but I don't want to put anyone to sleep.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 25, 2012)

Oh, what the hell, here is the long version. In the spirit of Forum Rule #6 I offer the following angle; one which I have not seen articulated anywhere yet, though it may have been. Speaking generically, all those *within* any community always have a light upon themselves; that is what makes them a community. They see each other. However, those outside of that community have a life, and communities of their own; these outsiders only see the first community when light shines upon it from without, or glows from within. And even this vision most often occurs with only a short attention span and fleeting interest. Some folks within a community even lament the fact others don’t pay enough attention to them, pay enough homage, or provide enough support. Then when interest is expressed, it’s too much and they complain. Everyone wants it “just right.” PerSec: The Special Operations Community might think that it is mighty special, and this is understandable. All communities are like that. But, quite frankly, absent the light from within, most other communities don’t think much about Special Operations. It seems to me if the AQ community has their attention drawn to, and is willing to spend their limited time, energy and resources in pursuit of the DEVGRU community (including families), that might be a good thing. If AQ is roaming our streets looking for targets, better they go after hard targets which operate under Big Boy Rules, and those communities whose calling is the defense of those outside of their community. Special Operations personnel are not more special than the people they are charged with defending. And to say they can’t or won’t do their job, or won’t do it as well if hounded by an enemy, or when worried about the safety of loved ones, well, that just won’t fly. BBRs. But I’m not so sure it’s really much of an issue. If what I am told by my government is true, AQ is composed of cowards who will seek to spend their limited time, energy and resources hitting soft targets in the U.S. On the other hand, my government could be wrong. I’m not aware of AQ (or those they inspire) going after shopping malls, trains, Super Bowl Games, Sikh, Christian or Jewish places of worship, movie theaters, swimming pools, college campuses, school yards, concerts and the like. I’ve only heard about the military targets (Pentagon, U.S.S. Cole, Ft. Hood soldiers (on and off base)) and strategic targets (embassies, the World Trade Centers, airlines, etc.), albeit with some “innocent” civilian collateral damage. (My quotes around “innocent” are intentional; see “America” below). So maybe the AQ community will start a personal vendetta-thing with the Special Operations community. Again, wouldn’t that be a good thing? So, back to the current media ruckus, either Special Operations people killed UBL, or the POTUS killed UBL, or “America” killed UBL; depending on who you talk to. Maybe all three killed UBL? But, as a Marine, I figure I’d rather they come after me than the POTUS or America. I’m not saying I’m special, but there is that whole “locate, close with and destroy” and “repel” thing. You’d think the Special Operations community would be saying: “Come and get me motherfuckers. That’s what I’m here for!” Camouflage, cover and concealment are good things, but the Special Operations PerSec thing might be just a little too “special” by their own analysis. When some group says “America” killed UBL and not the military Commander In Chief, they might be right, but I think they are shining the light in the wrong direction. Better they do what the author of the new book has done and say “Me, me, me!” Better they point their finger at the POTUS and say “Yeah, he killed your boy. Come and get him!” Better the AQ target is shifted away from “innocent” Americans and toward the military and its leadership. I don’t often hear civilians say how lucky they are to have our military fighting the enemy “over there” instead of here at home; it’s usually vets who say that. Nor do I often hear civilians invoking the quote about sleeping peacefully at night while rough men do their business; again, it’s usually vets who call upon that saying. To extend that same veteran reasoning, if AQ is over here, in America, walking our streets, looking for a target, I think it is better they seek out the rough men, don’t you? No doubt some hack from either side will spin these recent disclosures as intentional bait for AQ, laid by government in an effort to distract AQ from greater evil. OpSec I haven’t read the book so I don’t know if there are any OpSec violations within it. I’m not sure I would know even if I had read the book. Thank you for the opportunity to put this argument out there. I’m not married to it and I’m interested to hear another angle.


----------



## Centermass (Aug 25, 2012)

Interesting perspective. Although I'm not really sure that next drink helped. Guess I'm having one of those moments in my life. Nothing that can't be solved with a little Ragu......


----------



## goon175 (Aug 25, 2012)

The author in question put himself out there, and I'm not defending him.

As far as persec of SOF personnel in general, you do realize that their families aren't the highly trained killers that their husbands are, right?
You do realize that not every SOF soldier carries a weapon on him at all times, nor can he defend against suicide bombers, etc. right?
You do realize we have not only uncovered plans, but actually stopped terrorist attacks against soft targets in the U.S. right?
You do realize that AQ and even foreign intelligence agents have and do target SOF organizations and personnel right? In fact, DEVGRU had a pretty serious incident a couple years ago.

I could go on, but your post is lacking in logic in my opinion.


----------



## DA SWO (Aug 25, 2012)

Viper1 said:


> Can we say "persona non grata" boys and girls?


He'll still get invited to the annual reunion.

I am going to wait until the book is out before I work myself into a frenzy.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 26, 2012)

goon175 said:


> The author in question put himself out there, and I'm not defending him.
> 
> As far as persec of SOF personnel in general, you do realize that their families aren't the highly trained killers that their husbands are, right?
> You do realize that not every SOF soldier carries a weapon on him at all times, nor can he defend against suicide bombers, etc. right?
> ...


 
Hi goon175.  I do realize, or will stipulate to the facts set forth in all four of your first paragraphs, but fail to see how those facts undermine my argument in any way.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 26, 2012)

> So maybe the AQ community will start a personal vendetta-thing with the Special Operations community. Again, wouldn’t that be a good thing?


-As far as persec of SOF personnel in general, you do realize that their families aren't the highly trained killers that their husbands are, right?


> You’d think the Special Operations community would be saying: “Come and get me motherfuckers. That’s what I’m here for!”


-You do realize that not every SOF soldier carries a weapon on him at all times, nor can he defend against suicide bombers, etc. right?


> I’m not aware of AQ (or those they inspire) going after shopping malls, trains, Super Bowl Games, Sikh, Christian or Jewish places of worship, movie theaters, swimming pools, college campuses, school yards, concerts and the like. I’ve only heard about the military targets (Pentagon, U.S.S. Cole, Ft. Hood soldiers (on and off base)) and strategic targets (embassies, the World Trade Centers, airlines, etc.), albeit with some “innocent” civilian collateral damage.


-You do realize we have not only uncovered plans, but actually stopped terrorist attacks against soft targets in the U.S. right?


> The Special Operations Community might think that it is mighty special, and this is understandable. All communities are like that. But, quite frankly, absent the light from within, most other communities don’t think much about Special Operations.


-You do realize that AQ and even foreign intelligence agents have and do target SOF organizations and personnel right? In fact, DEVGRU had a pretty serious incident a couple years ago.


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 26, 2012)

I would suspect that any individual or group who is planning an attack to the extent of suicide bombing would have bigger and better targets than one ex SEAL. It's about risk vs reward. Why kill one guy when you could kill thousands?


----------



## goon175 (Aug 26, 2012)

If you know where one is, you can find out where the rest are. If you have a name, you can follow them, figure out where they eat, drink, shop, etc. It wouldn't take long to figure out where all the guys get together for drinks. A bar with an entire troop or squadron of operators would be a pretty lucrative target, no?


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 26, 2012)

Naturally, but why would you go for a hard(er) target when you can go easily for a soft and easy one? Occom's Razor and all that.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 26, 2012)

A bar full of drunk people isn't a soft target?


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 26, 2012)

Bombing Times Square or some celebration in downtown LA wouldn't spread fear and push their agenda much more?


----------



## policemedic (Aug 26, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> Bombing Times Square or some celebration in downtown LA wouldn't spread fear and push their agenda much more?


 
Symbolism, my good man, symbolism.  

Consider also the negative effect on the country's morale, and more significantly, on its ability to field SOF warriors if a birthday party attended by multiple Frogmen was blown into another dimension.

There is so much more to this discussion, but I'll not go further here.


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 26, 2012)

But that's my point, symbolism. Don't you go and steal it


----------



## Poccington (Aug 26, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Word on the street: Not a good week to be in NSW.... apparently the hammer is coming down, and hard, on those guys.


 
That's one of the most annoying things about this whole debale for me.

The author got out, now he'll get the fame, money, interviews etc. while the lads who are still serving in NSW are going to get it in the neck from the higher ups in their CoC.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 26, 2012)

policemedic said:


> Symbolism, my good man, symbolism.
> 
> Consider also the negative effect on the country's morale, and more significantly, on its ability to field SOF warriors if a birthday party attended by multiple Frogmen was blown into another dimension.
> 
> There is so much more to this discussion, but I'll not go further here.


 
Regarding morale: Americans tend to not get demoralized by these kinds of things.  They tend to get wound up instead, but even more so when the target is civilian.  In fact, when the target is civilian, we ask WTF?  Where was my government, my military?  I thought they were defending me so I could sleep peacefully at night? 

Whereas, when the target is military, be it a helicopter full of SEALs in AStan or a bar full of them CONUS, Americans tend to mourn and then carry on with the war.  I'm being generous here and you know it.

I am not saying the military, or their families and their respective communities are immune to feelings, I'm just saying that it comes with the job.  That is what I was always told and trained to believe.

As you noted, there is so much more to this discussion and you are correct.  A *lot* more.  I will extrapolate if the replies take the conversation in that direction, or if there is an interest in my thoughts on the matter.  Right now I have to take a retired Marine and her daughter on a hike.  :-/


----------



## Worldweaver (Aug 26, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> Bombing Times Square or some celebration in downtown LA wouldn't spread fear and push their agenda much more?


 
I would think that killing a group of 30+ Spec Ops warriors in a bar would be very appealing to most "radicals".  Men that they have sworn blood oaths against and celebrated intensely when they had the "honor" of killing one or two, while they themselves lost hundreds.  I believe that sometimes it gets down to the base desire of wanting revenge, not to say that they don't thrive for manipulation on the masses, but they may desire to show our nation what it can do to it's warriors at home.  

As stated before, plans have already been uncovered in the recent past, so there's no denying that this is one of "their" objectives.


----------



## LOOON (Aug 26, 2012)

This is fricken pathetic. You want to talk about how cool you think you are? Do it 10-20 years down the fricken road.

OPSEC and NDA's are a fucking joke.

Oh, and I guess some idiot released this idiot's name to news and now everyone knows who he is. If you don't want to people to know your real name, then why write a fricken book?!?!

This is just another example towards making the SEALs a joke..................and to a lesser extent, the Spec Ops community as a whole.

"Secret" now means "write a fucking book one year after an op"

Oh, and I hope this idiot gets prosecuted for this. Never happen, but one can hope........


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 26, 2012)

I hope the quiet professionals in the NSW community will forgive me, but I think that SEALs as a whole are going to bare the brunt of this and have to absorb the fall out from this book.  In the end, they will be the ones getting their shit pushed in because some dude is bitter about getting kicked out of Dev and decided to cash in.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 26, 2012)

> kicked out of Dev


 
Is that the explanation behind the mid-career ETS?


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 26, 2012)

Yeah, he wasn't kicked out of the Navy but knew that his reputation was shit so he got out of the service entirely.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 26, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR] . . .  some dude is bitter about getting kicked out of Dev and decided to cash in.[/quote]
 
[quote="JackMurphyRGR said:


> Yeah, he wasn't kicked out of the Navy but knew that his reputation was shit so he got out of the service entirely.


 
My turn to be confused.  What is the chronology here?  The first post makes it sound like he's bitter about getting kicked out so then decides to cash in.  The second post makes it sound like he decided to cash in and then left because he'd be PNG for doing so.

I'm ASSuming the second post is correct?  I find it hard to believe that one of the "best of the best" and one of the first through the door on UBL was getting kicked out of the Navy for some reason, was bitter and then decided to write a book about the raid.

Thanks for any clarification.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 26, 2012)

Both are correct, he was kicked out of Dev and then decided to leave the Navy on his own initiative.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 26, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> Both are correct, he was kicked out of Dev and then decided to leave the Navy on his own initiative.


 
Kicked out of Dev for writing the book, or something else?


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 26, 2012)

Something else.  It sounds like there was a lot of bad blood in the water as he departed.  He had to be very bitter to have thrown his old unit under the bus like this.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 26, 2012)

He'll probably make more money off this book than he would ever have made in the Navy.  I hope that helps him sleep at night.


----------



## Chopstick (Aug 26, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> He'll probably make more money off this book than he would ever have made in the Navy. I hope that helps him sleep at night.


But wont he be spending it all on "safe houses"?


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 26, 2012)

It will be a best seller for sure, and whatever is written in the book will automatically become the established narrative or "truth".  Like you say, I hope it was worth it.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 26, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> Something else. It sounds like there was a lot of bad blood in the water as he departed. He had to be very bitter to have thrown his old unit under the bus like this.


 
Wow!  I guess in my naive little world I was hoping for a team above and beyond personalities.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 26, 2012)

Chopstick said:


> But wont he be spending it all on "safe houses"?


 
He is completely, 100% safe as long as he adopts some very basic safety measures.  Well, least from Al Qaeda  he's safe


----------



## Chopstick (Aug 26, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> He is completely, 100% safe as long as he adopts some very basic safety measures. Well, least from Al Qaeda he's safe


That is what I was thinking.


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Aug 26, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> He is completely, 100% safe as long as he adopts some very basic safety measures. Well, least from Al Qaeda he's safe


Dude...Sir, you're what, 6'8", I'm pretty sure he'll see you coming.


----------



## Chopstick (Aug 26, 2012)

SkrewzLoose said:


> Dude...Sir, you're what, 6'8", I'm pretty sure he'll see you coming.


I thought Mara was a master of disguise?


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 26, 2012)

SkrewzLoose said:


> Dude...Sir, you're what, 6'8", I'm pretty sure he'll see you coming.


 
You're confusing me with Polar Bear.  He's the designated site giant; I am a mere 6'5".   ;)   And besides, going after people physically isn't my style.  I would LOVE to help prosecute this guy, but 1) I don't think it's going to happen; and 2) I'm not really in a position to do that in my current assignment.

The best I can do right now is wish him misfortune.


----------



## SpitfireV (Aug 26, 2012)

Worldweaver said:


> I would think that killing a group of 30+ Spec Ops warriors in a bar would be very appealing to most "radicals". Men that they have sworn blood oaths against and celebrated intensely when they had the "honor" of killing one or two, while they themselves lost hundreds. I believe that sometimes it gets down to the base desire of wanting revenge, not to say that they don't thrive for manipulation on the masses, but they may desire to show our nation what it can do to it's warriors at home.
> 
> As stated before, plans have already been uncovered in the recent past, so there's no denying that this is one of "their" objectives.


 
Look, I totally know where you're coming from, but if a group, who have limited capacity to make attacks due to limited resources (and providing they're not being tracked) are going to commit an attack the chances are *more than likely* that they'll say "hey, let's attack x open target" because it means they have to put less leg work in for bigger and better results.

At the end of the day, it's mostly academic anyway.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 26, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> Look, I totally know where you're coming from, but if a group, who have limited capacity to make attacks due to limited resources (and providing they're not being tracked) are going to commit an attack the chances are *more than likely* that they'll say "hey, let's attack x open target" because it means they have to put less leg work in for bigger and better results.
> 
> At the end of the day, it's mostly academic anyway.


 
I agree.  Cost/benefit analysis doesn't support individual targeting at that kind of micro level.  The only way I could see it differently is if there is someone already in the US who gets all jihad-y and wants to make himself a name in the community by offing "the guy who got Bin Laden" (even though this guy claims to be "one of the first" through the door, which to me means he got there after Osama was already dead).


----------



## goon175 (Aug 26, 2012)

or he may just be sticking to the fact that they collectively aren't saying which one shot him. He may have lost allegiance, but going that far would be too much.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 26, 2012)

goon175 said:


> or he may just be sticking to the fact that they collectively aren't saying which one shot him. He may have lost allegiance, but going that far would be too much.


 
I think if he shot the guy, he would totally blab it ;)

"Now, the firsthand account of the man who killed Bin Laden!"


----------



## Ravage (Aug 27, 2012)

Well it was bound to happen:

http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/sea...source=SFnewyorkpost&utm_medium=SFnewyorkpost

The former Navy SEAL who has written his eyewitness account of the slaying of Osama bin Laden is in talks with *Steven Spielberg* to turn the book into an action movie, Page Six can exclusively reveal.
The author, who uses the pseudonym Mark Owen, was “one of the first men through the door on the third floor” of bin Laden’s lair in Pakistan and was there when he died, according to publisher Dutton.
The book — “No Easy Day: The Firsthand Account of the Mission That Killed Osama bin Laden — will be released on Sept. 11.
Following the book announcement, Fox News revealed that Mark Owen is 36-year-old recently retired SEAL *Matt Bissonnette*. Then special operations chief Adm. *Bill McRaven* said Bissonnette could face prosecution for revealing sensitive and classified information that could cause US forces harm.
Meanwhile, multiple sources tell us Bissonnette has already been in talks with DreamWorks about turning his book into a movie.
One source said, “He met with HBO’s *Richard Plepler*, and he also met with Spielberg.”
Another source added, “He is still talking to DreamWorks and Spielberg,” who declined to comment.
A “No Easy Day” movie would add to an already busy field of bin Laden films. “Hurt Locker” director *Kathryn Bigelow* is working on “Zero Dark Thirty,” about the decade-long hunt for terrorist leader bin Laden, leading to his death in May 2011. The cast includes *Scott Adkins*, *Joel Edgerton*, *Jessica Chastain* and *Taylor Kinney*, with release set for Dec. 19
Meanwhile, the Weinstein Company has secured the US rights to “Code Name Geronimo,” the *John Stockwell*-directed drama about the manhunt for the 9/11 terror-attack mastermind.
According to reports, Weinstein will put the film in theaters in early fall, a move that would beat “Zero Dark Thirty” — which was delayed after Sony decided not to put it out ahead of the presidential election.​


----------



## pardus (Aug 27, 2012)

That just pisses me off.


----------



## policemedic (Aug 27, 2012)

Spielberg can't tell the story anyway; he won't allow guns in his films.  The SEALs would be pointing radios at UBL.


----------



## pardus (Aug 27, 2012)

Spielburg is a fucked up liberal who makes excellent movies but lets his politics override commonsense and even his own cultural heritage.

In Saving Private Ryan the CO and the SGT both talk about how saving pvt ryan will be the one decent thing they pull out of the war and the one thing that earns them the right to go home.

Because yes, thats a loftier goal to a liberal than saving freedom or even the industrialized murder of around 12,000,000 people including 6,000,000 Jews Mr Spielburg!


----------



## Chopstick (Aug 27, 2012)

policemedic said:


> Spielberg can't tell the story anyway; he won't allow guns in his films. The SEALs would be pointing radios at UBL.


He doesnt? Maybe he will have to bring back Indiana Jones then.


----------



## DA SWO (Aug 27, 2012)

Chopstick said:


> He doesnt? Maybe he will have to bring back Indiana Jones then.


Harrison Ford was sick and ad-libed the shot; he was supposed to use the whip to disarm his opponent.


----------



## dknob (Aug 27, 2012)

Viper1 said:


> And no, *I won't be* purchasing *or reading this book*.


 
hah. I highly doubt that.


----------



## dknob (Aug 27, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> Bombing Times Square or some celebration in downtown LA wouldn't spread fear and push their agenda much more?


 
If the headlines next morning read: "25 Navy SEALs killed in suicide bombing during a birthday party in Virginia Beach".

It would be far more devastating to morale for the military and population then if the headlines read: "87 Civilians killed in suicide bombing in New York City subway"


----------



## Ravage (Aug 27, 2012)

pardus said:


> Spielburg is a fucked up liberal who makes excellent movies but lets his politics override commonsense and even his own cultural heritage.
> 
> In Saving Private Ryan the CO and the SGT both talk about how saving pvt ryan will be the one decent thing they pull out of the war and the one thing that earns them the right to go home.
> 
> Because yes, thats a loftier goal to a liberal than saving freedom or even the industrialized murder of around 12,000,000 people including 6,000,000 Jews Mr Spielburg!


 
I don't get it what his political views have anything to do with this?
His movies (those military focused) are one of the best recruiting tools I have seen in years.


----------



## pardus (Aug 27, 2012)

Ravage said:


> I don't get it what his political views have anything to do with this?
> His movies (those military focused) are one of the best recruiting tools I have seen in years.


 
I thought that post was self explanatory however... That movie said that the war was pointless, the only decent thing those Soldiers did was save PVT Ryan. I guess we should have left the Nazis alone when they invaded Poland. 

Your second sentence is neither here nor there.


----------



## reed11b (Aug 27, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> You're confusing me with Polar Bear. He's the designated site giant; I am a mere 6'5". ;) And besides, going after people physically isn't my style. I would LOVE to help prosecute this guy, but 1) I don't think it's going to happen; and 2) I'm not really in a position to do that in my current assignment.
> 
> The best I can do right now is wish him misfortune.


 I bet they always put you at the front of the formation for ruck marches to. Bastard.
Reed


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Aug 27, 2012)

reed11b said:


> I bet they always put you at the front of the formation for ruck marches to. Bastard.
> Reed


 Best thing tall folks can do is road guard.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 27, 2012)

reed11b said:


> I bet they always put you at the front of the formation for ruck marches to. Bastard.
> Reed


 

:)

A 15-minute mile pace is very comfortable for me, I always told my guys as long as they were in front of me, they would make time.  The only time I went fast was when I was rucking by myself.


----------



## dknob (Aug 27, 2012)

haha wait guys i had my message backwards..
i meant that the 25 SEALs killed in suicide bombing in Virginia would be more devastating**

so you three who agreed with me, you need to disagree now.

<--- still foreign


----------



## Desperado (Aug 27, 2012)

dknob said:


> haha wait guys i had my message backwards..
> i meant that the 25 SEALs killed in suicide bombing in Virginia would be more devastating**
> 
> so you three who agreed with me, you need to disagree now.
> ...


 
I was uncertain about your initial post (thanks for the clarification) and therefor decided to just put in my argument on the matter, without trying to parse yours, so here goes.

I think that *if* anyone is going to get demoralized about a hit, then military personnel *should* be more demoralized about a hit on the civilians they are charged with defending, than a hit on themselves.  Civilians, on the other hand, *should* be more demoralized about a hit on "our troops" than a hit on themselves.  However, my understanding of human nature, and Americans in particular, leads me to believe the opposite is true in both cases.  And I think that is a sad testament to our character.  However, on the bright side, I don't think Americans, military or civilian, are prone to demoralization when attacked.  Instead, they get pissed and motivated.  So it may be a moot point.

(The only caveat regarding civilians being prone to greater demoralization about a hit on themselves is that some Americans don't seem like they'd be too upset if the enemy killed fellow Americans with whom they disagree politically; such is the division we have in America these days between "liberals" and "conservatives".  Again, sad, but off topic.  The foregoing paragraph stands on it's own, without this digression.)

In my original post, it was agreed that AQ is here.  It was agreed that AQ was planning hits.  In response to a challenge, I even agreed that AQ would hit soft targets if they could.  (That was a stipulation to a challenge which actually made my point even stronger).  So, they are here.  They want to hit.  They can hit soft or hard targets.  The question is, which would be preferable *if* there will be a hit? 

So here's a hypothetical that is a worst case scenario against my argument:  The possibility of a hit on the non-military loved ones of Special Operations personnel.

If AQ is at the mall to take out the wife and baby of an operator, or the wife and baby of John Doe, is anyone willing to argue that the former are more special than the latter?  To do so, even in the exigencies of war, and discussions of morale, smacks of quartering troops, or conducting the defense of this nation in such a fashion as to destroy the very thing it is designed to defend.  It's UN-American, in my opinion.

I've heard these men call themselves "gun fighters."  It brings to mind former POTUS Bush's talk of wanted posters and the old west, and the movies I grew up with.  Gunfighters who made a name for themselves spent the rest of their lives looking over their shoulders, not only for enemies and other men like themselves, but also for the next young punk who wanted to earn a name for himself as a killer, and the one who took down X.  This was alluded to by someone else, above, not me. 

It's a tough life and Big Boy Rules apply.  If you want to avoid that shit then either you don't live it, or you better keep your name out of the lights.  But *if* your name is out there, for whatever reason, better it be the gun fighter or his loved ones who are stalked than John Doe or the people the gunfighter was sworn to defend.  The gunfighter, and his loved ones, are a smaller target, easier to protect, and might even be bait in the worst case.  And, while his family might not have, the gunfighter signed on for these possibilities.  I won't go into the choices, if any, made by his family.  But if we, as a nation, don't want that, or are worried about it, then maybe the operators and family should all stay on base somewhere until the war is over (Wow, I can't believe I even thought of this war ever being over; that brings up a whole 'nother subject about Spec Ops). 

It's pretty much a uniquely American thing where we get to go abroad, kick ass, and then come home to relative safety.  Most other countries don't have that luxury.  If we are starting to lose that luxury, and if we are starting to suffer what other countries have had to deal with since Christ was a Corporal, then wouldn't it be best if our enemy did what we say we do: Go abroad and seek out combatants?  Who are we to complain when the they would do what we would have them do?

Again, this is all based on "if".


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 27, 2012)

dknob said:


> haha wait guys i had my message backwards..
> i meant that the 25 SEALs killed in suicide bombing in Virginia would be more devastating**
> 
> so you three who agreed with me, you need to disagree now.
> ...


 
I think you had it right the first time.  Given bare numbers alone, people in the US are more likely to know someone who works at Wal-Mart than someone on active duty in the military.  Military types getting killed isn't "real" to them.  25 SEALS died in a suicide bomb?  "Oh, well, sucks to be them, glad I'm not a SEAL."  25 people get blown up in Wal-Mart?   " I shop at Wal-Mart!!  That could have been me!  I better sit in my house until the bad people all go away."   Shit just got real.


----------



## dknob (Aug 27, 2012)

Well at the same time a CONUS attack against our special operations members will put the fear in them : "if they aren't safe then we definitely arent"


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 27, 2012)

Are you guys really war gaming this shit?  Listen, America is ready to shit its pants at a moments notice.  One IED on a highway somewhere and this country will shut down for days if not weeks.  The thing doesn't even have to go off, it could be a fake and the media cycle would run the story over and over to generate ad revenue, scaring the hell out of the public in the process.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 27, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I think you had it right the first time. Given bare numbers alone, people in the US are more likely to know someone who works at Wal-Mart than someone on active duty in the military. Military types getting killed isn't "real" to them. 25 SEALS died in a suicide bomb? "Oh, well, sucks to be them, glad I'm not a SEAL." 25 people get blown up in Wal-Mart? " I shop at Wal-Mart!! That could have been me! I better sit in my house until the bad people all go away." Shit just got real.


 
^^^This.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 27, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> Are you guys really war gaming this shit? Listen, America is ready to shit its pants at a moments notice. One IED on a highway somewhere and this country will shut down for days if not weeks. The thing doesn't even have to go off, it could be a fake and the media cycle would run the story over and over to generate ad revenue, scaring the hell out of the public in the process.


 
^^^This too.  Unfortunately.

I'd use like buttons and whatnot, but I guess I don't rate.


----------



## pardus (Aug 27, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> Are you guys really war gaming this shit? Listen, America is ready to shit its pants at a moments notice. One IED on a highway somewhere and this country will shut down for days if not weeks. The thing doesn't even have to go off, it could be a fake and the media cycle would run the story over and over to generate ad revenue, scaring the hell out of the public in the process.


 

Didn't we already find and IED or 2 down south that belonged to a cartel? It may have been in Mexico itself...


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 27, 2012)

In Mexico for sure there have been a couple.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 28, 2012)

> We’ve also seen IED tactics and techniques used by insurgents increase in sophistication and proliferate globally. Take, for example, the explosively formed projectile that we saw in Iraq has made its way to the Gaza Strip, and recently in Somalia — all tracking back to Iran and Iran-supported organizations. Vehicle-borne IEDs that we’ve seen in the Middle East, we’re now seeing in Mexico. And the use of female suicide bombers — pioneered by the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka — spread throughout the Middle East, worked its way to Southeast Europe, and most recently have been employed in Somalia and Nigeria.


*https://www.jieddo.mil/content/docs/20120608_LTG Barbero Remarks_RUSI_As Prepared.pdf*


----------



## pardus (Aug 28, 2012)

Thanks guys.


----------



## Isiah6:8 (Aug 28, 2012)

Desperado said:


> I'd use like buttons and whatnot, but I guess I don't rate.


 
Nope, you just haven't used the search button enough, it will set you free...;)


----------



## Desperado (Aug 28, 2012)

Isiah6:8 said:


> Nope, you just haven't used the search button enough, it will set you free...;)


 
When I am *not* logged in, I see disagree and agree X's and Checks but cannot press them.  When I am logged in, those X's and Checks disappear all together.  I'm not sure why I should have to use a search button to "like" a post, or even what I would search for to figure out what is usually a default option.  Meh, it's not a big deal.  I'd like to be able to edit my posts too (my second one in this thread was pasted from Word but the paragraphs, indents, etc. did not transfer and it's almost unreadable).  Apparently you can only edit if you are vetted and I'm not, so . . ..


----------



## Isiah6:8 (Aug 28, 2012)

PM sent. All of this is info can be found, answered, and enabled by using a search, but YMMV ;).

I agree with Jack's point, I think the media would literally nut all over themselves at the opportunity to run with a story like that as bad as that sounds.


----------



## KBar666 (Aug 29, 2012)

Haven't been around for quite sometime.   This thread has a lot of replies.  Honestly too much to sit here and read right now.  Can someone some up basically what the thoughts are here on the book?

Thanks


----------



## pardus (Aug 29, 2012)

KBar666 said:


> Haven't been around for quite sometime. This thread has a lot of replies. Honestly too much to sit here and read right now. Can someone some up basically what the thoughts are here on the book?
> 
> Thanks


 
Are you fucking kidding me!?

Read the thread you lazy fuck.


----------



## Ravage (Aug 29, 2012)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/28/no-easy-day-bin-laden-raid-book_n_1837947.html


NEW YORK -- The much-anticipated firsthand account of the Navy SEALs raid that killed Osama bin Laden reveals the terrorist leader was unarmed and was already dead with a bullet to the brain when the SEALs entered his bedroom in the compound at Abbottabad, Pakistan.

As the SEALS ascended a narrow staircase, the team's point man saw a man poke his head from a doorway, wrote a SEAL using the pseudonym Mark Owen (whose real identity has since been revealed by Fox News) in “No Easy Day,” a copy of which was obtained at a bookstore by The Huffington Post.

"We were less than five steps from getting to the top when I heard suppressed shots. BOP. BOP," writes Owen. "I couldn't tell from my position if the rounds hit the target or not. The man disappeared into the dark room."

Team members took their time entering the room, where they saw the women wailing over Bin Laden, who wore a white sleeveless T-shirt, loose tan pants and a tan tunic, according to the book.

Despite numerous reports that bin Laden had a weapon and resisted when Navy SEALs entered the room, he was unarmed, writes Owen. He had been fatally wounded before they had entered the room.

"Blood and brains spilled out of the side of his skull” and he was still twitching and convulsing, Owen writes. While bin Laden was in his death throes, Owen writes that he and another SEAL "trained our lasers on his chest and fired several rounds. The bullets tore into him, slamming his body into the floor until he was motionless."

Then the SEALS repeatedly examined his face to make sure he was truly bin Laden. They interrogated a young girl and one of the women who had been wailing over Bin Laden’s body, who verified that it was the terror leader.

The shots fired inside the room appear to contradict the mission they were given. During a meeting with top commanders, a lawyer from either the Pentagon or the White House "made it clear that this wasn't an assassination," writes Owen, who recounted the instructions: "I am not going to tell you how to do your job. What we're saying is if he does not pose a threat, you will detain him."

Searching bin Laden’s neatly organized room, Owen found two guns -– an AK-47 and a Makarov pistol -– with empty chambers. “He hadn’t even prepared a defense. He had no intention of fighting. He asked his followers for decades to wear suicide vests or fly planes into buildings, but didn’t even pick up his weapon. In all of my deployments, we routinely saw this phenomenon. The higher up the food chain the targeted individual was, the bigger a pussy he was.”
The book calls out inaccurate accounts of the assault. "The raid was being reported like a bad action movie," Owen writes. "At first, it was funny because it was so wrong."

Contrary to earlier accounts, Owen says SEALs weren't fired upon while they were outside the gate of the compound. There was no 40-minute firefight. And it wasn't true that bin Laden had "time to look into our eyes."

Owen, a 36-year-old SEAL who also took part in a previous 2007 attempt to get Bin Laden and was involved in the heroic 2009 operation to free Captain Richard Phillips from pirates off the coast of Somalia, also had harsh words for President Barack Obama.

Though he praises the president for green-lighting the risky assault, Owen says the SEALS joked that Obama would take credit for their success. On his second night in Afghanistan waiting for final orders, sitting around a fire pit and joking about which Hollywood actors would play them in the bin Laden movie, one SEAL joked, “And we’ll get Obama reelected for sure. I can see him now, talking about how he killed bin Laden,” according to Owen.

Owen writes: “We had seen it before when he took credit for the Captain Phillips rescue. Although we applauded the decision-making in this case, there was no doubt in anybody’s mind that he would take all the political credit for this too.”

Later, while watching Obama’s speech announcing the raid, Owen writes: “None of us were huge fans of Obama. We respected him as the commander in chief of the military and for giving us the green light on the mission.” When one SEAL jokes again that they got Obama reelected, Owen asks, “Well, would you rather not have done this?”

He writes: “We all knew the deal. We were tools in the toolbox, and when things go well they promote it. They inflate their roles. But we should have done it. It was the right call to make. Regardless of the politics that would come along with it, the end result was what we all wanted.”

Later, when they meet Obama at the White House, Owen says he was reluctant to sign the American flag presented to the president because it would disclose his identity. So, at least one SEAL scribbled a random name on the flag. While going through the metal detector to meet the president, Owen’s pocketknife set off the alarm.

After listening to Obama’s speech and enduring Biden’s “lame jokes that no one got (He seemed like a nice guy, but he reminded me of someone’s drunken uncle at Christmas dinner)" the president invited the team to return to his residence later for a beer.

But Owen writes a few weeks later: “We never got the call to have a beer at the White House.” Joking with a fellow SEAL, “Hey, did you ever hear anything about that beer?” Walt cracks: “ You believed that shit. I bet you voted for change too, sucker.”

Tommy Vietor, spokesman for the White House National Security Council, said in an email: "As President Obama said on the night that justice was brought to Osama bin Laden, 'We give thanks for the men who carried out this operation, for they exemplify the professionalism, patriotism, and unparalleled courage of those who serve our country.'"


----------



## pardus (Aug 29, 2012)

> Later, when they meet Obama at the White House, Owen says he was reluctant to sign the American flag presented to the president because it would disclose his identity.


 
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!


----------



## TheSiatonist (Aug 29, 2012)

^^Hahaha. How ironic.

====================

OK so it's not clear if the Federal Gov't has the authority to stop a book like this from getting out?



> *Anti-Obama SEAL group wants bin Laden raid book stopped*
> 
> A group of ex-Navy SEALs wants the Obama administration to use any means available to halt publication of a new book detailing the Osama bin Laden raid.
> 
> ...


----------



## dknob (Aug 29, 2012)

this makes SO Much sense now.

"Mr. President, we ask that you don't ask us which one of us killed bin Laden"

dum dum dum..
cus none of them did! the punk killed himself. 

That really does make so much sense.



to the "im not touching this book" people on here - yeah fucking right!!!


----------



## JBS (Aug 29, 2012)

Why would the Obama administration block a book about something they've been very publicly high-fiving themselves over for a year now?

Hell they approved the movie before anyone even mentioned the book.


----------



## goon175 (Aug 29, 2012)

I wonder if the movie production company is working in some adjustments to the storyline right about now...haha


----------



## Ravage (Aug 29, 2012)

Preview delay anyone ? :)


----------



## dknob (Aug 29, 2012)

I think 0Dark30 is set in stone.

Its in post production. All the actors are home or working on different projects.


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Aug 29, 2012)

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20120829/US.Bin.Laden.Book/?cid=hero_media

A story similar to the one Ravage posted.  
It points out discrepancies between "what really happened" in the book and what the administration reported.  Seems to me that if you wanted to avoid conflicts of interest, both parties (BHO and Matt B.) should have kept their fucking mouths closed.  The terrorist cunt face is dead, end of story.


----------



## KBar666 (Aug 29, 2012)

pardus said:


> Are you fucking kidding me!?
> 
> Read the thread you lazy fuck.


 

Haha.  Alright than.


----------



## Centermass (Aug 29, 2012)

dknob said:


> to the "im not touching this book" people on here - yeah fucking right!!!


 

Some of us still have principles, morals and beliefs and stand by them. I know in this day and age, to most in the population, it's a foreign concept, but still exists within some of us. And to answer your statement, whether it turns out in print or goes to the big screen, I won't be reading or viewing either venue.

And not because it's a SEAL centered theme, it's because of how it came to be.


----------



## dknob (Aug 29, 2012)

You may not read the book or watch the movie - but you will immerse yourself in the intelligence that comes out of it. Whether from book reviews or wikipedia article on the operation. At the end of the day - you WILL know how the hit went down because of the book.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 29, 2012)

I still haven't watched Act of Valor...

On the other hand, I will probably have to review an advance copy of No Easy Day before it is released for fact checking if nothing else.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 29, 2012)

I find some inconsistencies or ambiguities in the article:

". . . when I heard suppressed *shots. BOP. BOP*,"

". . . he was *unarmed*, writes Owen."

It is very hard to shoot yourself twice.  It might be hard to shoot yourself and be "unarmed" depending on how you define "unarmed."  Did the weapon fly from his hand after shooting himself, thus rendering him unarmed?  If so, where is it?  Or was he truly unarmed, meaning someone else (not a SEAL) shot him?  These inconsistencies lead me to believe someone else shot him.  His wife, the young girl or . . . ? 

However:

"He *hadn’t even prepared a defense*. He had *no intention of fighting*. He asked his followers for decades to wear suicide vests or fly planes into buildings, but didn’t even pick up his weapon. In all of my deployments, we routinely saw this phenomenon. The higher up the food chain the targeted individual was, the *bigger a pussy he was*.”

This is stupid.  First, UBL may not have anticipated the need to prepare a defense or engage in a fight.  How long had he lived peacefully in PStan?  Second, if the SEALs executed their mission properly, which apprently they did, then there would be no oportunity to fight; surprise, violence of action, volume of fire, all that shit.  See below.

So, if the SEALs did not shoot him, and he did not shoot himself, and if he was unarmed, and if a search of the room disclosed only two unloaded weapons, and no defense was prepared, then WTF?   

"*And it wasn't true that bin Laden had "time to look into our eyes*."

Yeah, so how is he going to mount a defense or fight?

As to the harsh words for the POTUS, if I were the POTUS I'd say, okay, next time SEALs won't get the call.  I'll try dialing up someone who can keep their fucking mouths shut, keep their politics to themselves, honor their NDAs and keep their personality conflicts in the school yard.  Oh, no such thing due to human nature?  Well then, maybe we'll just send in a cruise missle next time.

I wonder if Mr. "Owen" is going to give us all some insight into the in-house problems he had, or is he all of a sudden so "professional" that he won't air team dirty laundry?  LOL!


----------



## Ravage (Aug 29, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> I still haven't watched Act of Valor...


 
From a civi point of view its a fun movie - a Transformers-like popcorn flick, but with no Meg Fox and no transformers.


----------



## pardus (Aug 29, 2012)

I have no desire to read/watch this story.


----------



## AWP (Aug 29, 2012)

Desperado said:


> It is very hard to shoot yourself twice. It might be hard to shoot yourself and be "unarmed" depending on how you define "unarmed." Did the weapon fly from his hand after shooting himself, thus rendering him unarmed? If so, where is it? Or was he truly unarmed, meaning someone else (not a SEAL) shot him? These inconsistencies lead me to believe someone else shot him. His wife, the young girl or . . . ?


 
I must have missed it in the article, where does he assert that the SEALs did NOT shoot UBL?

The way I read it, the first guy through the door shot him and the author who was second did not witness the shots. If UBL was unarmed, the author just made it possible for some leftist, liberal d-bag to scream "murder!"


----------



## Desperado (Aug 29, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> I must have missed it in the article, where does he assert that the SEALs did NOT shoot UBL?
> 
> The way I read it, the first guy through the door shot him and the author who was second did not witness the shots. If UBL was unarmed, the author just made it possible for some leftist, liberal d-bag to scream "murder!"


 
The first three paragraphs of the article make it clear (if the article is to be believed) the author is contending that UBL was dead already and not shot by SEALs.  The plural in SEALs, plus the language of those paragraphs is not ambiguous.


----------



## pardus (Aug 29, 2012)

dknob said:


> cus none of them did! the punk killed himself.


 



Desperado said:


> The first three paragraphs of the article make it clear (if the article is to be believed) the author is contending that UBL was dead already and not shot by SEALs. The plural in SEALs, plus the language of those paragraphs is not ambiguous.


 


> As the SEALS ascended a narrow staircase, the team's point man saw a man poke his head from a doorway,
> 
> "We were less than five steps from getting to the top when I heard suppressed shots. BOP. BOP," writes Owen. "I couldn't tell from my position if the rounds hit the target or not. The man disappeared into the dark room."


 
I dont know where you guys got he shot himself/was shot from someone else from.

He poked his head out, shots were fired, he went back inside the room.
Sounds like he got shot in the head when he poked it out to me!


----------



## Desperado (Aug 29, 2012)

Okay, I went and re-read it several times and, while it is a poorly written article, I guess it's possible they are saying a SEAL shot UBL with a suppressed weapon when he stuck his head out the door, leading to the inference that UBL fell back into to the room, to be found flopping when the SEALs entered the room.

The rest of my analysis stands.


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Aug 29, 2012)

SEALs going up staircase > UBL pokes head out > UBL takes 2 suppressed shots to the face from SEALs > SEALs enter room to find UBL (surprise, surprise) with 2 gun shot wounds, twitching

How is that difficult to glean from these articles?


----------



## dknob (Aug 29, 2012)

eh I got confused.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 29, 2012)

SkrewzLoose said:


> SEALs going up staircase > UBL pokes head out > UBL takes 2 suppressed shots to the face from SEALs > SEALs enter room to find UBL (surprise, surprise) with 2 gun shot wounds, twitching
> 
> How is that difficult to glean from these articles?


 
The fact that more than one person didn't glean it lends support to the idea that the article was poorly written.  The article does not say a SEAL (point man or otherswise) shot UBL (you have to infer that) and, with the whole lack of explanation regarding the room and the suppressed nature of the shots and the failure to actually see the shooting, it could also be infered the shooting took place inside the room.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 29, 2012)

SkrewzLoose said:


> SEALs going up staircase > UBL pokes head out > UBL takes 2 suppressed shots to the face from SEALs > SEALs enter room to find UBL (surprise, surprise) with 2 gun shot wounds, twitching
> 
> How is that difficult to glean from these articles?


 
An example:  Where does it say the two shots were "to the face", "from SEALs," or there were "2 gun shot wounds."  It's easy to fill in blanks with poorly written articles.


----------



## pardus (Aug 29, 2012)

Desperado said:


> An example: Where does it say the two shots were "to the face", "from SEALs," or there were "2 gun shot wounds." It's easy to fill in blanks with poorly written articles.


 


> The first three paragraphs of the article *make it clear* (if the article is to be believed) the author is contending that UBL was dead already and not shot by SEALs. The plural in SEALs, plus the *language of those paragraphs is not ambiguous*.


 

I think I'd be being a little more humble right about now, but that's just me. ;)


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Aug 29, 2012)

Desperado said:


> An example: Where does it say the two shots were "to the face", "from SEALs," or there were "2 gun shot wounds." It's easy to fill in blanks with poorly written articles.


 
"with a hole visible on the right side of his head"

"Blood and brains spilled out of the side of his skull”

Maybe you're right, they shot him in the leg causing blood/brains and a visible hole in his head...
MHO is that the public doesn't need to know all the details. These men work in secrecy for a reason (what Matt B. blabs about is a whole 'nother story). As I said earlier, the fucker is dead. Move on.
ETA: One minute you're saying the article is NOT AMBIGUOUS, then you say it's easy to fill in the blanks because it's poorly written.  Which is it?


----------



## pardus (Aug 29, 2012)

OK, OK, relax.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 29, 2012)

SkrewzLoose said:


> "with a hole visible on the right side of his head"
> 
> "Blood and brains spilled out of the side of his skull”
> 
> ...


 


SkrewzLoose said:


> "with a hole visible on the right side of his head"
> 
> "Blood and brains spilled out of the side of his skull”
> 
> ...


 
As to your last question, and whether there is ambiguity, and having read several other interpretations of this from other people on other sites, I stand by my analysis that the article is poorly written.  It *could* be interpreted as a SEAL having done the shooting, but that rquires the same level of inference (read ASSumption) as my initial read.  So, it *is* ambiguous.  *I was wrong about that*.  But I won't suck your dick if that's what you are looking for.  And here's why:

With with "*a*" (singular) hole visible on the "right *side* of his head" (i.e. not in his face) and shit spilled out from the "*side*" (not the back) of his skull, how does anyone get two shots to the face and two wounds, much less that a SEAL fired the shot?  ASSumption.


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Aug 29, 2012)

And with that, I'm done here.


----------



## AWP (Aug 29, 2012)

Maybe I need more sleep because this thread has devolved into the laughable for me.

We're bickering over a poorly written article about a book which shouldn't exist, authored by a guy naive enough to think he'd remain anomymous and who admittedly did not see the shooting?


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 29, 2012)

Centermass said:


> Some of us still have principles, morals and beliefs and stand by them. I know in this day and age, to most in the population, it's a foreign concept, but still exists within some of us. And to answer your statement, whether it turns out in print or goes to the big screen, I won't be reading or viewing either venue.
> 
> And not because it's a SEAL centered theme, it's because of how it came to be.


 
I agree.

I will not support sellouts like the author of this book, or anything written by Thomas Greer (AKA "Dalton Fury"  ) or anyone of their ilk.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 29, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> Maybe I need more sleep because this thread has devolved into the laughable for me.
> 
> We're bickering over a poorly written article about a book which shouldn't exist, authored by a guy naive enough to think he'd remain anomymous and who admittedly did not see the shooting?


 
Good point.  Reminds me of a sig line on another site, to paraphrase: "This is supposed to be a happy occasion.  Lets not bicker over who killed who."


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 29, 2012)

Desperado said:


> ...But I won't suck your dick if that's what you are looking for. ...


 
I know you're new here, but that's not necessary and not appropriate for the kinds of conversations we're trying to have on the site.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 29, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I know you're new here, but that's not necessary and not appropriate for the kinds of conversations we're trying to have on the site.


 
PM sent.


----------



## dknob (Aug 29, 2012)

Lots of news agencies are now coming out with articles that say: "Obama account of bin Laden death contradicts that of SEAL memoir".

Scumbags are always looking for fuel for the fire.


----------



## DoctorDoom (Aug 29, 2012)

Ravage said:


> From a civi point of view its a fun movie - a Transformers-like popcorn flick, but with no Meg Fox and no transformers.


 
So it's just a piece of crap Michael Bay film without any redeeming value?

That's good information, I'm saving my money.


----------



## DoctorDoom (Aug 29, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> Are you guys really war gaming this shit? Listen, America is ready to shit its pants at a moments notice. One IED on a highway somewhere and this country will shut down for days if not weeks. The thing doesn't even have to go off, it could be a fake and the media cycle would run the story over and over to generate ad revenue, scaring the hell out of the public in the process.


 
I don't agree; because a failed but partially exploded VBIED was found in Times Square.  Wasn't recycled endlessly, didn't shut anything down for more than few hours.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 29, 2012)

This is probably an effective way to deal with this kind of thing, keep writers and publishers (and movie producers) from profiting from their misdeeds:



> The U.S. government sued on the grounds that he did not seek pre-publication review -- as he was obligated to do under an agreement he signed as a condition of employment -- and lower courts agreed to a demand that all the profits from the book be turned over to the government. By a vote of 6-3, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed, even though the government never claimed the book revealed classified information.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 29, 2012)

DoctorDoom said:


> I don't agree; because a failed but partially exploded VBIED was found in Times Square. Wasn't recycled endlessly, didn't shut anything down for more than few hours.


 
What do you think would happen if an IED took out a semi truck on I-95 tomorrow?


----------



## RyanSC (Aug 29, 2012)

60 Minutes Segment....
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57502917/seal-tells-60-minutes-book-is-for-honor-not-politics/


----------



## Desperado (Aug 29, 2012)

One of the first things you learn in Political Science is that war is politics.


----------



## CDG (Aug 29, 2012)

RyanSC said:


> 60 Minutes Segment....
> http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57502917/SEAL-tells-60-minutes-book-is-for-honor-not-politics/


 
What a load of shit.  It's about commemorating 9/11?  Give me a fucking break.  Also, I love how 60 Minutes tries to turn him into a victim at the end by talking about how his real name was published so he's now a marked man and probably in hiding forever.  Well fucking guess what dude?  That's what you fucking get for selling out your brothers to make some fucking cash and then trying to wrap yourself in the cloak of patriotism and remembrance.  The more about this guy that comes out, the more I dislike him.


----------



## pardus (Aug 30, 2012)

DoctorDoom said:


> So it's just a piece of crap Michael Bay film without any redeeming value?
> 
> That's good information, I'm saving my money.


 

I equated Act of Valor to Thin Red Line, a movie that should have been really good but turned out to be crap with one or two good fight scenes.


----------



## DoctorDoom (Aug 30, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> What do you think would happen if an IED took out a semi truck on I-95 tomorrow?


Same thing that happens every long weekend.  Nightmarish traffic jams, people pissing themselves in their cars on a highway that suddenly became a parking lot, a few weeks of hand-wringing from politicians, and then nothing.  Mostly because I think the Americans who would be freaking out already have, and most Americans are looking too forward to getting whatever useless crap at the mall to be bothered to get worked up into a lather.  Same with media outlets; terrorism is SO 2005.  If no one is going to get worked up about a VBIED a few miles from Ground Zero, no one will get too excited about a VBIED on I-95.  Just my opinion.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 30, 2012)

Yeah, I understand where you are coming from.  Remember a couple years ago when that Chinese dude walked into the arrivals terminal to hug his wife as she was on her way out?  They then got in their car and went home, no big deal.  But he had gone passed the security line and security reacted by shutting down the entire airport.  That one little incident shut down like five or six airports for the entire day.

I think that VBIED in Times Square was one of those fools that the FBI grooms for years on end until they can convince them to conduct a terror attack.  The FBI seems very good at creating patsies, then busting the terrorists they create, and then taking credit for the bust in the media.  This is something of a different cycle because the federal government in this case controls the terrorist, the bomb, the detonator, and ultimately how this information is presented to the media.  Off the top of my head, I can't remember if the Times Square bomber meets this definition or not, but it is something to think about.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 30, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> Y...
> 
> I think that VBIED in Times Square was one of those fools that the FBI grooms for years on end until they can convince them to conduct a terror attack. The FBI seems very good at creating patsies, then busting the terrorists they create, and then taking credit for the bust in the media. This is something of a different cycle because the federal government in this case controls the terrorist, the bomb, the detonator, and ultimately how this information is presented to the media. Off the top of my head, I can't remember if the Times Square bomber meets this definition or not, but it is something to think about.


 
Nope, this was a legitimate attempted terrorist attack, which was thwarted only by the ineptitude of the perpetrator.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Times_Square_car_bombing_attempt



> The *attempted car bombing of Times Square* on May 1, 2010, was a planned terrorist attack that was foiled when two street vendors discovered the car bomb and alerted a New York Police Department (NYPD) patrolman to thecar bomb threat after they spotted smoke coming from a vehicle.[1][2] The bomb had been ignited, but failed to explode, and was disarmed before it caused any casualties.[1][3][4]


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 30, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> Nope, this was a legitimate attempted terrorist attack, which was thwarted only by the ineptitude of the perpetrator.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Times_Square_car_bombing_attempt


 
Right on.  Thank god these guys are so dumb...


----------



## AWP (Aug 30, 2012)

How worked up our nation becomes is in direct proportion to how much coverage the media bestows on an event.


----------



## LimaOscarSierraTango (Aug 30, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> How worked up our nation becomes is in direct proportion to how much coverage the media bestows on an event.


 
Let's test it.  Jersey Shore is coming to an end.


----------



## Scotth (Aug 31, 2012)

LimaOscarSierraTango said:


> Let's test it. Jersey Shore is coming to an end.


 
Yay for no more Jersey Shores but unfortunately it is be replaced by toothless hillbilly reality TV.:sick:


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 31, 2012)

Scotth said:


> Yay for no more Jersey Shores but unfortunately it is be replaced by toothless hillbilly reality TV.:sick:


 
I hope they don't "talk like they're from Alabama."


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Aug 31, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I hope they don't "talk like they're from Alabama."


 They certainly won't be driving any flag-adorned classic cars.


----------



## AWP (Aug 31, 2012)

The Pentagon has issues with the book:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/30/world/asia/us-seal-book-bin-laden/index.html?hpt=hp_t3



> *Washington (CNN)* -- The Pentagon general counsel threatened legal action Thursday against a former Navy SEAL who wrote a revealing book about last year's Osama bin Laden raid, warning him he has violated secrecy agreements and broken federal law.


 
So where are the Super Friends OPSEC Group when you need them? When will we see their video and outrage?


----------



## dknob (Aug 31, 2012)

I don't get it. I thought SOCOM cleared it.


----------



## Ravage (Aug 31, 2012)

On the other hand, don;t you guys/galls think that all of this just works really well in promoting the book it self? I mean, what could be a better PR move, than to say "this book was banned by the Pentagon, now you too can learn some secret stuff and feel like a big man!". Instant win in my eyes.

Same thingwas with Urbans' "Task Force Black", the MoD talked about not giving him a 'thumbs up' to publish the book (which btw, revealed infos an untrained person like me thought should not be written down in the first place).


----------



## Scotth (Aug 31, 2012)

dknob said:


> I don't get it. I thought SOCOM cleared it.


 
From what I have read the book hasn't been vetted by anyone in the military.


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Aug 31, 2012)

Not all attention is good attention.  PR or not, there are those like Centermass and Marauder06 who won't buy the book now based on the fact that the guy is a sellout.  I'd be willing to bet there are quite a few others out there of the same mindset and won't sacrifice their morals/beliefs for a book that's received the kind of attention this one has.


----------



## DasBoot (Aug 31, 2012)

SkrewzLoose said:


> Not all attention is good attention.  PR or not, there are those like Centermass and Marauder06 who won't buy the book now based on the fact that the guy is a sellout.  I'd be willing to bet there are quite a few others out there of the same mindset and won't sacrifice their morals/beliefs for a book that's received the kind of attention this one has.


That's why I didn't purchase Wasdin's book. I'll probably spend six months reading this book 30 minutes at a time in a Barnes and Nobles.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 31, 2012)

dknob said:


> I don't get it. I thought SOCOM cleared it.


 
If SOCOM had cleared it, I would have had no issue with him publishing it.  In fact, I would support it by buying a copy.  But AFAIK no one cleared it.  I don't even think he TRIED to have it cleared, most likely because he knew what he was doing was wrong but kept seeing those $$$ and his name in lights...


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 31, 2012)

Ravage said:


> On the other hand, don;t you guys/galls think that all of this just works really well in promoting the book it self? I mean, what could be a better PR move, than to say "this book was banned by the Pentagon, now you too can learn some secret stuff and feel like a big man!". Instant win in my eyes.
> 
> Same thingwas with Urbans' "Task Force Black", the MoD talked about not giving him a 'thumbs up' to publish the book (which btw, revealed infos an untrained person like me thought should not be written down in the first place).


 
Yes, it works very well for the author and the publishing company, which is what I think you mean.  But until and unless the US gets serious about punishing the transgressors, it's only going to continue to get worse.  The Pentagon is making a lot of noise about "punishing" the author of this latest book, but I would wager that nothing serious is ever going to happen to the guy.  What I think SHOULD happen:

1) Recall him to active duty and court-martial him.  If he is convicted, reduction to E1, forfeiture of pay and allowances, massive jail time at Leavenworth or somewhere equally unpleasant.
2)  A lawsuit specifically targeting both him and the publishing company, suing for all profits as well as the government's lawyer fees.  The proceeds of this action to be plowed back into OPSEC and intel security measures.
3)  Some type of legal action that enjoins anyone else (e.g. movie producers) from making any other works based on the book.
4)  An unambiguous and credible threat from the DoD, DoJ, and the federal gov't that if you break your oath and violate national security, you're going to get the same thing.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 31, 2012)

No one cleared it.  The publisher announced the book and afterwords the book's PR team had a come-to-jesus phone call with McRaven's PAO...who is also not capable of clearing this book.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 31, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> The Pentagon has issues with the book:
> http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/30/world/asia/us-SEAL-book-bin-laden/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
> 
> 
> ...


 
OPSEC penned a harshly worded memo to Eric Holder about this book.  I share your skepticism about OPSEC as a special interest group in the run up to an election.


----------



## dknob (Aug 31, 2012)

What is the difference between books like No Way Out and Kill Bin Laden from books like Blaber's Mission, Men, and Me?

I don't understand why there was never any comoplaints against Mr. Blaber?


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 31, 2012)

dknob said:


> What is the difference between books like No Way Out and Kill Bin Laden from books like Blaber's Mission, Men, and Me?
> 
> I don't understand why there was never any comoplaints against Mr. Blaber?


 
There is no difference, they are all sellouts, they have all been PNG'd from the community, they should all be prosecuted, and I will never buy anything they write.  Search for their names here on the site, I'm pretty sure we had a similar reaction to those authors as we are now having to this one.


----------



## KBar666 (Aug 31, 2012)

I too was under the impression, that after being called out for not having it cleared, Advance copies of the book were given for review. and it was cleared.  Which I could remeber which article was stating it....  could be wrong info.  But I know I read it somewhere.  I will look for said article....


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 31, 2012)

KBar666 said:


> I too was under the impression, that after being called out for not having it cleared, Advance copies of the book were given for review. and it was cleared. Which I could remeber which article was stating it.... could be wrong info. But I know I read it somewhere. I will look for said article....


 
Sometimes, what authors will do is submit it for "clearance" to an organization that they know is not the appropriate release authority.  For example, an Army officer who had served with the Task Force ran whatever POS book he wrote on his experiences through the SSO at his Reserve unit, knowing full well that the person in that job was not affiliated with the Task Force in any way, was never read on, and wouldn't know what was sensitive or what wasn't (IIRC).  

Another dodge is to "submit" the book for approval, and then when it gets denied, to publish anyway.  That way they can say, "Well, we submitted it for approval," which is technically true, but we told you not to publish and you did it anyway.

If "No Easy Day" was submitted to SOCOM (which is the proper release authority) and it was cleared, then that's a completely different story.  But I'm willing to wager that's not what happened, and I haven't read or heard about anything that would indicate it had.


----------



## dknob (Aug 31, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> There is no difference, they are all sellouts, they have all been PNG'd from the community, they should all be prosecuted, and I will never buy anything they write. Search for their names here on the site, I'm pretty sure we had a similar reaction to those authors as we are now having to this one.


 
I understand. But it does seem like he has taken zero to little hits comparede to the rest.


----------



## CDG (Aug 31, 2012)

All well and good that they want to prosecute this guy.  He deserves it.  However, you can't prosecute him and let all these loose-lipped politicians off the hook.  Obama and his fucktarded staff have done plenty to deserve prosecution as far as leaks go.  Not to mention that the Justice Dept. hardly has any credibility to go after anyone for anything as long as Holder is running it, IMHO.


----------



## Marauder06 (Aug 31, 2012)

dknob said:


> I understand. But it does seem like he has taken zero to little hits comparede to the rest.


 
Sure.  I think there was just less interest in what he wrote about.


----------



## KBar666 (Aug 31, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> Sometimes, what authors will do is submit it for "clearance" to an organization that they know is not the appropriate release authority. For example, an Army officer who had served with the Task Force ran whatever POS book he wrote on his experiences through the SSO at his Reserve unit, knowing full well that the person in that job was not affiliated with the Task Force in any way, was never read on, and wouldn't know what was sensitive or what wasn't (IIRC).
> 
> Another dodge is to "submit" the book for approval, and then when it gets denied, to publish anyway. That way they can say, "Well, we submitted it for approval," which is technically true, but we told you not to publish and you did it anyway.
> 
> If "No Easy Day" was submitted to SOCOM (which is the proper release authority) and it was cleared, then that's a completely different story. But I'm willing to wager that's not what happened, and I haven't read or heard about anything that would indicate it had.


 

Update to my previous post, found article. I had thought it was cleared, but after rereading I realize this only states it "summited"

US officials checking SEAL raid book for secrets
By KIMBERLY DOZIER AP Intelligence Writer The Associated Press
Monday, August 27, 2012 3:37 PM EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. officials said Monday that they are reviewing a copy of a soon-to-be-published account of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, checking for leaks of classified information.

Pentagon spokesman George Little said Defense Department officials "received the manuscript and we are looking at it."

CIA spokesman Preston Golson would only say that "the CIA has a copy of the book."

The book, "No Easy Day," is scheduled for publication on Sept. 11.

The author, a former Navy SEAL who participated in the raid, did not submit the book for pre-publication review that is required by the military secrecy agreements officials say he signed.

Pentagon regulations stipulate that retired personnel, former employees and non-active duty members of the Reserves "shall use the DoD security review process to ensure that information they submit for public release does not compromise national security."

Pentagon officials say that if they determine the manuscript reveals classified information about the raid, the Pentagon would "defer to the Department of Justice."

If there is classified information in the book, the former SEAL could face criminal charges.

The publisher says the author intends to give the "majority" of the proceeds to charity, but the Justice Department could still sue to collect any future book proceeds as well.

A special operations advocacy group, Special Operations-OPSEC, which is criticizing President Barack Obama over alleged leaks and making the raid the national security centerpiece of his re-election campaign, asked the attorney general to block the book's release until the government can make sure it reveals no classified information.

In a letter released to The Associated Press, the group asked the Justice Department "to immediately seek...an injunction in federal court to prevent this book from being published and distributed" until it can be reviewed.

Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd says the department is reviewing the letter.

Dutton announced the book's pending release last week, saying that "No Easy Day" will "set the record straight" on the bin Laden operation. The author is listed under the pseudonym of Mark Owen, and the publisher had asked news organizations to withhold his identity. He has since been identified as Matt Bissonnette, who retired from the Navy last summer.

After the initial burst of publicity, the book shot up to the top of the Amazon.com chart, reaching No. 1 as of late Friday morning and remaining there Monday, displacing the million-selling erotic trilogy "Fifty Shades of Gray."


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 31, 2012)

Blaber's book is disguised and/or butchered as a self help book about leadership which I think helped keep him out of trouble.  I don't know if his book was reviewed by the military or not.  There were complaints about Blaber but they were a little more private.  "Mark Owen" wanted a splash and a splash he got.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 31, 2012)

The way this is working is that the publisher will not sign with the author unless a "special operations" attorney who now works for a private firm blesses off on the manuscript.  I think I know who the attorney is but will withhold the name for now.  With the attorney signing off on it, the publisher than feels that they have a certain level of legal protection.  This is my lay persons understanding of what is going on behind the scenes anyway.


----------



## dknob (Aug 31, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> Sure. I think there was just less interest in what he wrote about.


 
I understand. On a side note what is with all my typos today...

As for little interest in Blaber's book. I thought there was plenty of OPSEC violations in there. The Balkan PFWIC ops, the "fake" tank division in Iraq, etc. I thought all those were very interesting and obscure tactics/strategies I have not personally seen or heard of before.


----------



## AWP (Aug 31, 2012)

The fake tank division in Iraq was covered in other sources prior to Blaber's book. I think Cobra II devoted a chapter or two to JSOC's work out there including Haditha Dam.


----------



## Desperado (Aug 31, 2012)

When this story first came out there were folks on the right saying that it was timed to help the POTUS and folks on the left saying it was timed to hurt the POTUS.  If POTUS/Holder prosecutes, they'll be damned as having leaked in their own right, or for not liking the author's tone.  If they fail to prosecute, they'll be damned for permitting the hyping the UBL hit right before the election.  Either way, the POTUS is screwed unless he just tries to rise above it, turn it over to McRaven (who himself has been accused of cow-towing to the POTUS because he's still in uniform) and let him and SOCOM deal with it.

P.S.  I thought someone here linked a cite proving that if the POTUS does it, it is, prima facie, not a leak.  Makes sense to me and seems to be in accord with Bush doctrine.


----------



## Centermass (Aug 31, 2012)

Well, here's the icing on the damn cake. This will be aired in its entirety September 9th.

60 Minutes Interview Preview

And on top of that, someone already has the book before it's been cleared or scrubbed. Heard this earlier today on the radio. This idiot Bergen ain't any better than the rest.

Peter Bergen Interview

This whole thing has gone beyond wrong in its disclosure, documentation, discovery and exposure and just went to the next level of stupid when it comes to the security of classified material and this nation as a result.

I liken it to an EMO complex of look at me look at me........fuckin amazing


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Aug 31, 2012)

Robert D. Luskin was the attorney involved...

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/poli...-author-rejects-pentagons-legal-threat/56433/


----------



## policemedic (Aug 31, 2012)

Ravage said:


> On the other hand, don;t you guys/galls think that all of this just works really well in promoting the book it self? I mean, what could be a better PR move, than to say "this book was banned by the Pentagon, now you too can learn some secret stuff and feel like a big man!". Instant win in my eyes.
> 
> Same thingwas with Urbans' "Task Force Black", the MoD talked about not giving him a 'thumbs up' to publish the book (which btw, revealed infos an untrained person like me thought should not be written down in the first place).


 
You're hardly an untrained, naive neophyte Ravage.


----------



## 275ANGER! (Sep 1, 2012)

policemedic said:


> You're hardly an untrained, naive *neophyte* Ravage.


 
Never seen that word used outside of a Fraternity.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 3, 2012)

Not sure if this is worth any value but I'll add it anyway..
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/03/us/bin-laden-books-navy-author-was-slighted-account-says.html?_r=1


----------



## Ravage (Sep 3, 2012)

Interesting take by Dalton Fury

http://www.commandposts.com/2012/09/no-easy-day-from-one-who-has-been-there/

Next week I will visit hallowed ground. I will stand on the corner of West and Vesey Street, face the National September 11Memorial, and look skyward toward the flight paths of American Airlines flight 11 with 175, which struck the World Trade Towers eleven years earlier. I will do it because I have a choice, because I am one of millions of Americans that hasn’t forgotten, and because there is no place on earth I’d rather be than downtown Manhattan on the anniversary of 9/11.​​Since that first jumbo jet slammed into tower one at 8:46:30 AM that Tuesday morning our nation has struggled through two long wars that have tested the mettle of America’s finest young men and women—and which were arguably were focused on killing one man. This past week not only reminded me of these long wars, but it also offered some odd nostalgia and a large dose of déjà vu.


First, I learned the same time as the rest of the world that one of America’s secret members of SEAL Team Six, which executed Operation Neptune Spear, had authored a book titled _No Easy Day_, about the shadowed exploits of the team and how al Qaeda mastermind Usama Bin Laden really met his maker. I was a shocked by the news. Like most tier one operators, I thought I was still in tune with the happenings of the secret world I left behind, even in retirement.

Then I learned the book’s author elected to invoke a pseudonym. The author chose to conceal his true name for two reasons—reasons with which I am very familiar. One, to ensure America focuses on the story and his teammates, not on “Mark Owen,” the individual. Had Owen used his true name, the claims of glory hunting would be loud and wide spread. Second, he chose to author under a pseudonym to protect his family and former teammates from enemies of the state.

During his many years in Six, Owen kept secrets. He is now sharing some of what he experienced. His critics have called those experiences “secrets.”

But Owen isn’t the first Six guy to share his experiences. With a quick count, I know of five Six guys to beat the pseudonymous Owen to the punch. The tsunami of negative press and personal attacks on both the author Owen, and his co-writer Kevin Maurer, surprised me. Sure, I knew they would take it on the chin for a bit, but I didn’t anticipate the massive amount of character bashing, name-calling, and the irresponsible leak of Owen’s true name and home address. It hit close to home.

Four years ago I authored the book _Kill Bin Laden_, appeared on _60 Minutes_, and took on a pseudonym to protect my family and stiff arm the cries of glory hunting. These same steps were taken by Owen, who isn’t looking for fame either. “The UBL raid was such a gigantic event that this story needed to be told for the history books,” Owen said.

In 2008, I told the true story of the early hunt for Bin Laden because I felt America needed to know. But after reading Owen’s book, I know his story is clearly more important. Whether Americans needed to know or not is truly debatable. Owen’s work closes the loop on one of the longest manhunts in history and is certainly something the majority of Americans want to know.

And if not all Americans, Owen knows a specific class of young men will appreciate it. “99% of the SEALs that I know joined because they also read a book,” he said. Owen isn’t the only SEAL that thinks books written by warriors for America’s future warriors are a good idea. In a recent open letter to current and former members of the special operations community, Admiral McRaven, a former SEAL Team Six commander and current commander of all special ops troops wrote that he personally benefited from reading about the “exploits of our legendary heroes” in books that share “wonderful accounts of courage, leadership, tough decision making, and martial skill.”

At the same time it reminded me of a culture literally set in stone that mandates a life time tag of _persona non grata, _or PNG, for any Tier One operator who writes about his unit.

The culture of a Tier One unit is not only unique, it is protected. But, after ten plus years at war, most Americans know there to be two Special Mission Units—the Army’s Delta Force and the Navy’s SEAL Team Six. Members of these organizations sign non-disclosure agreements, or NDA, before they can drop their kit bags in the team room. The signature is binding for life. The NDA is perfectly clear about disclosing information, and includes steps that must be followed to ensure the information is checked by competent authority prior to release. If signing the form letter isn’t enough deterrent from one day sharing experiences, the culture is designed to police anyone considering otherwise.

Basically, what happens down range stays down range. You don’t talk about it, you definitely don’t write about it. And anyone who blows off the rules, even if he does seek and receive security reviews from the proper authorities for 18 months as I did, is ostracized, demonized, and banned. That’s not Merriam-Webster’s exact definition of having been PNGed, but it about covers it.

Everyone serving in a Tier One unit has their every need seen to while they are operational. Nine out of ten, upon retirement or release from these two elite units, will only have the skills, knowledge, and know-how they learned while serving the ranks—skill sets that are limited to a select few, but very much earned by the same select few. Are these skill sets marketable? Of course they are. Whether they should be is irrelevant. The demand is there and the operators need to work when they leave the teams, too.

Almost every former unit operator includes the phrases “Delta Force” or “SEAL Team Six” in their resumes. The ones that don’t are so well known in their trade that it isn’t necessary, or they still have some support or business ties to the organization that they don’t want to jeopardize. Either way, captured on a web site or not, you are cashing in largely on what you learned and experienced while serving the Tier One ranks.

Some “black” SPECOPS warriors become independent contractors with the CIA and head back down range. Former teammate and Delta operator William “Chief” Carlson did in 2003 and was killed in a Taliban ambush. Former mate Dale “Slugger” Comstock, one of the operatives in the NBC reality show Stars Earn Stripes spent eight years serving his country as an independent contractor on the battlefield. Some take less dangerous routes. They may teach tactics, shooting, jumping, driving, lock picking, assault planning, or even open up their own business to solve real problems. Among a dozen other things related to the skills you learned and earned while in a Tier One unit, you can even consult for a video game company.

And, you can write a book.

From that moment on, it’s yours to lose. The standards are extremely high, as they should be. We all know that talking about the unit, particularly in a tell-all memoir, regardless of how vanilla the contents are, is tantamount to alumni suicide.

Let me be clear here. I’m referring only to members of Delta Force and SEAL Team Six—not Army Green Berets, not “white” Navy SEALs, not conventional military soldiers, airmen, or Marines. If you are even remotely interested in reading this post, you know the book stores are filled with memoirs authored by former military men and women. Yes, absolutely, they are true heroes, but I know of none that are PNGed from their communities.

Write about your time in a Tier One unit absolutely equals PNG for life. This will prove to be the most damning psychological stain on Owen.  Been there, done that—when I wrote _Kill Bin Laden_, in which  national security was not put at risk and no special operations unique tactics, techniques, procedures or personalities were compromised.

I read an advance copy of Owen’s book, _No Easy Day_. Folks, former SEAL Team Six warrior Mark Owen, who gave his country 12 years of faithful service, does not disappoint the American people.
The manuscript was combed over by a trusted agent, a former special operations attorney who has performed similar vetting reviews for other military authors. I’m absolutely convinced and entirely confident that Owen’s book does not reveal any secret tactics, sensitive techniques or delicate procedures that would put current servicemen and women in jeopardy.

Owen isn’t the first person involved with the May 2011 raid to go public with details that some might argue should be protected. President Obama’s administration confirmed the participation of Navy SEALs on national television within a few hours of the raid. Last week, Judicial Watch published communication between CIA and film makers Mark Boal and Kathryn Bigelow, indicating that “Boal and Bigelow would be ‘meeting individually with both [name redacted] and the translator who was on the raid…’” Admiral McRaven has sat down and discussed various aspects of the raid with journalists, too.

Just as Admiral McRaven is smart enough to know what to share and what to protect, Owen is equally careful in _No Easy Day_ not to allow innocuous facts to be compiled to potentially compromise sensitive national security information. Instead, he captures the essence of what it is like to live your life as a protector of the freedoms all of us hold so dear. Owen said, “Look at Hollywood stars, pro athletes etc., nobody, and I repeat nobody, does what we do, for the reasons we do it. That’s the story, not Mark Owen.”

Owen credits his SEAL mates for living a code, working for relative pennies, and shunning fame and fortune. Men who are willing to go into harm’s way to potentially make the ultimate sacrifice in some far off forgotten land that most folks can’t even spell correctly. Owen is spot on when he says, “Society needs to know that there are men out there fighting for their freedoms–who don’t do it for money, don’t do it for fame, but do it for the greater good.” I shared the details of the hunt for Bin Laden in the Tora Bora Mountains in 2001 for the exact same reasons.

America, thank Mark Owen for having the courage to share the moment when his mate took the national shot that dropped the man responsible for the death of nearly 3,000 innocent people eleven years ago. Like every other operator in Abbottabad, Pakistan, that night, Mark Owen is a national hero. Owen and the rest of SEAL Team Six earned it. Owen also earned PNG status, simply because he violated the code. Had he been a “white” SEAL, a Green Beret, or a conventional soldier writing a memoir, he’d simply be a hero. But because he was in Six, a Tier One outfit, he is a hero irrevocably stained with PNG status. It couldn’t have been a surprise. He knew it going in. I’m no hero, but like me, he had a choice.

Unfortunately, PNG status might prove the least of Owen’s problems after his true name was leaked roughly twenty-four hours after public announcement of the forthcoming book. Being dubbed PNG is largely an adolescent slap at a former operator’s reputation. All Tier One operators have either a good one or bad one well before the decision to write a book is made. Some mates will stand by you, others will shun you. But compromising an operator’s true name is much more serious.

Owen has already been publically targeted on al Qaeda associated or Islamic extremist web sites. Revealing Owen’s true name not only endangers his family, but it also potentially puts the cross hairs on his SEAL mates. It didn’t take long for someone to out Owen to FOX News, and in this Internet age, would anyone be surprised if a sophisticated enemy of the United States peeled the onion to add names to their kill list? Owen chose a pseudonym because he wanted to protect others. He knew his choice put him at risk. Irresponsible disclosure of his true name helped al Qaeda more than the actual contents of the book he wrote.

I know Owen has his share of skeletons and demons, how many of us don’t? I also know my mates and I would have taken a bullet on target for him simply because we were all Tier One operators doing the dirty work we were so fortunate to be trusted by a nation to do. We were Army, him Navy–all American servicemen doing our best among America’s best to accomplish the mission and bring everyone home.

I write this now because I have a choice. Everyone I know wishes they could have stood next to Owen when he entered Bin Laden’s compound. But we didn’t have a choice. More than ten years have passed since we had our shot at Bin Laden. It’s been less than a year and a half since Owen and his Six mates raided his hideout. I can either stand idly by, in the shadows, hoping to be left alone and ignored, or I can extend a hand to a mate in need. For me, it’s an easy decision. All of you will make your own choice.


----------



## AWP (Sep 3, 2012)

That was a particularly self-serving article by MAJ Greer.

I think I'd like to coin a term, or at least I haven't heard it used before: "smyooping." To author a book which has you banned for life from your old unit. Usage: "Bissonette needed some quick cash so he went smyooping and found a publisher."


----------



## Desperado (Sep 3, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> That was a particularly self-serving article by MAJ Greer.
> 
> I think I'd like to coin a term, or at least I haven't heard it used before: "smyooping." To author a book which has you banned for life from your old unit. Usage: "Bissonette needed some quick cash so he went smyooping and found a publisher."


 
Okay, I confess, I don't get it: "smyooping": s-my-ooping?  Sounds good, but I need a breakdown.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 3, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> That was a particularly self-serving article by MAJ Greer.
> 
> I think I'd like to coin a term, or at least I haven't heard it used before: "smyooping." To author a book which has you banned for life from your old unit. Usage: "Bissonette needed some quick cash so he went smyooping and found a publisher."


 
LOL, (laughing at the word not what you said)

How would that be pronouced?


----------



## AWP (Sep 3, 2012)

Desperado said:


> Okay, I confess, I don't get it: "smyooping": s-my-ooping? Sounds good, but I need a breakdown.


 
SMU PNG


----------



## Desperado (Sep 3, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> SMU PNG


 
Got it. The "y" threw me. Now you just need to copyright it and make some coin.


----------



## AWP (Sep 3, 2012)

I went with a phonetic spelling...hey, I need more coffee this morning so I guess it could also be "smooping.". :)


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 3, 2012)

Ravage said:


> Interesting take by Dalton Fury
> 
> http://www.commandposts.com/2012/09/no-easy-day-from-one-who-has-been-there/
> ...
> ...


----------



## Chopstick (Sep 3, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> I went with a phonetic spelling...hey, I need more coffee this morning so I guess it could also be "smooping.".


"Smooping" is smoking and pooping at the same time.  Urban Dictionary says so. 
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Smooping


----------



## DasBoot (Sep 3, 2012)

Sir, has anyone ever told you that you would be a great asset to the Duffleblog?


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 3, 2012)

Fury says his book went through an 18-month vetting process which I would think precludes him from "selling out".  Does anyone know the actual facts about this?  The internet is full of RUMINT that Fury freelanced the book and did his own thing.  Did, or did he not, obtain approval via the proper channels before publishing?


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 3, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> Fury says his book went through an 18-month vetting process which I would think precludes him from "selling out". Does anyone know the actual facts about this? The internet is full of RUMINT that Fury freelanced the book and did his own thing. Did, or did he not, obtain approval via the proper channels before publishing?


 
Yes, I know firsthand because I was involved in the review and later the damage assessment.  He DID NOT receive permission to publish, and as a result is PNG from the community.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 3, 2012)

Wow.  So what was the 18-month vetting about?  Who did that and what went wrong?


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 3, 2012)

I was on the, "read this and tell me if anything is wrong with it" end, I don't know what happened before or after.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 3, 2012)

hope this question is not the sort of thing that gets me in trouble here. If this is something I should not ask, than please simply tell me, I will understand.

Anyway making a long story short I went ahead and read that ebook, mentioned in an article earlier today.

In it, there is a statement that this book being released basically is ruining the SEAL Teams reputation( not just the author but all memebers of the SEAL Teams in general)

That is is causing them to be seen as nothing but braggarts.

And that it is also going/already resulting in the SEAL Teams reduction of conducting certain mission/operations and future quoted "Choice Operations"

Is this really the case? or is most of the bad blood simply towards the author?

Again I hope this question does not get me in trouble here with anyone please understand I am an outsider and am asking from an outsider point of view, I'm not looking for any secrets or what not, just a general curiousity. As to me it is a shame that this one man actions could possibly destory what other have worked so hard for.


----------



## Ravage (Sep 3, 2012)

How many SPECWAR literature has been released in the past few years?

- SEALs by Ossman
- SEAL Team Six by Wasdin
- Op. Geronimo by Pfarrer
- American Sniper by Kyle
- Red Circle by Webb
and now Owens "No Easy Day".


----------



## Desperado (Sep 3, 2012)

KBar666 said:


> And that it is also going/already resulting in the SEAL Teams reduction of conducting certain mission/operations and future quoted "Choice Operations"


 
I'm an outsider also, but here's my take on it:

Most people don't give a shit (including journalists). They just hope there will be a movie/scoop and they hope it will be good. Then, after two hours in the theater and twenty minutes around the water cooler, they will go back to work and start wondering what's next on Net Flicks or who's boffing who. And even all of that will only occupy a tiny fraction of their thoughts for the day.

Most terrorists don't give a shit either.

That leaves the community and the POTUS's advisers. The community is no different than any other community, in that they think they are special and therefor they will have drama. Let them have it.

The political advisers, also human beings, might succumb to the natural thinking "You know what? If we're going to make the call, maybe next time I'll call someone else, besides SEALs, who will: A. Let me take credit; and B. Keep their mouths shut, or at least not dis me because they don't like my politics or the fact that I get to be the one who breaks the news or spill the beans. In fact, humans being humans, next time I'll let some kid in a cubical in California fire a fire and forget missile over the horizon."

But I really seriously doubt that anyone *outside* the community is sitting around thinking SEALs are braggarts, at least any more than anyone else.  Most people outside the community will just be thinking "SEALs got the call, SEALs killed UBL, SEALs are super heroes."  They will forever be known as the outfit that killed UBL.

I could be wrong.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 3, 2012)

I would think (hope) that mission assignment went to the team with a better plan, or based on environment (SEALs for maritime ops) and not on future book releases or sales.


----------



## dsumner (Sep 3, 2012)

Ravage said:


> How many SPECWAR literature has been released in the past few years?
> 
> - SEALs by Ossman
> - SEAL Team Six by Wasdin
> ...


 
Actually there's more than that. Just look on Google.


----------



## Worldweaver (Sep 3, 2012)

Desperado said:


> But I really seriously doubt that anyone *outside* the community is sitting around thinking SEALs are braggarts at least any more than anyone else.
> I could be wrong.


 
Actually that is exactly what I, and many I know, think of the SEALs


----------



## Desperado (Sep 3, 2012)

Worldweaver said:


> Actually that is exactly what I, and many I know, think of the SEALs


 
Sorry, I should have been more clear.  When I said outside "the community" I was talking about the SOF community in general, not just Devgru/Delta.   People here, like you, are interested in this kind of stuff, as am I, and here we are, talking about it.  We give a shit, or we would not be here.  There are some civilian SOF groupies, and family, too.  But we are a tiny, tiny fraction of the U.S.  I doubt most people even think of SEALs as braggarts or anything else, good or bad, unless someone sticks their face in it, and even then it's probably like "Oh, SEALs, bad dudes.  Cool.  They got UBL.  Say, did you see that new video game . . . "

I know tons of people who have lives that don't involve anything to do with the military, much less SOF, much less Tier 1 stuff.  They think it's all Green Berets.


----------



## Brian1/75 (Sep 3, 2012)

Worldweaver said:


> Actually that is exactly what I, and many I know, think of the SEALs


The keyword is outside the community. Most civilians I know think they are the shit, don't get the controversial about the book, think they should be able to sell their experiences for money classified or not, Fox News are a bunch of criminals for dropping his name and just think the POTUS or Pentagon is trying to cover things up/shut someone up.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 3, 2012)

If I may for the record when I asked the question, I had meant how others in the military/SOF see them.

Not the general public.

That was question I was asking.

Sorry I should have been more specific.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 3, 2012)

The consensus among the public is that SEALs do everything and are the best at everything, ever.  There is no talking them out of that because the SEAL's have a PR presence that the public has invested in.  Among other SOF units, I think we have a more measured opinion about the SEAL Teams.  I don't hate them, I've conducted successful joint operations with SEALs, but I am aware of their limitations.


----------



## Brian1/75 (Sep 3, 2012)

SEALs have had a braggart rep for awhile. DEVGRU isn't necessarily really in the lime-light. I doubt they'll lose missions over it because of more recent events. It's in reality their first leak outside of their founder. DEVGRU keeps hitting the news because the Navy wants to make sure you know it's Navy SEALs out rescuing hostages off the coast of Somalia, so they can stay relevant in this century. It just doesn't take a genius to figure out it's not some platoon from ST3 doing the op.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 3, 2012)

That's been the result of the Navy's PR machine over the last twenty or so years.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 3, 2012)

KBar666 said:


> If I may for the record when I asked the question, I had meant how others in the military/SOF see them.


 
I see human beings, and all that entails.

Special? Yes. Within the community.

But not that special outside the community. And, while you are asking about the opinions of military/SOF, I think context is important. It's a good thing when any community remembers that it is not the center of the universe; especially when that community serves other communities and especially in a very limited arena.

Will the talkers be PNG? That's a family matter and I would not allow my feelings to be influenced by one side or the other. If ST 6 wants to ostracize an author, that will not cause me to do so. I judge each man as he comes and try not to let others tell me who my enemies are. Personally, I wouldn't treat one of them any different than their nemesis. Just me.

P.S.  As to genuine PerSec/OpSec issues, I would defer to any independent, objective tribunal of competent jurisdiction, sans political motivation.


----------



## jordan (Sep 4, 2012)

Just picked it up. Read a little while looking at it in Barnes&Noble.

We shall see.


----------



## Deadpool (Sep 4, 2012)

jordan said:


> Just picked it up. Read a little while looking at it in Barnes&Noble.
> 
> We shall see.



I'm not going to lie, I just finished the book.


----------



## AWP (Sep 5, 2012)

Brian1/75 said:


> It's in reality their first leak outside of their founder.


 
There was Howard Wasdin's book from a year or two ago.

I acquired a copy of No Easy Day and am halfway through it. The opening "explanation" (calling it an Introduction would be a huge stretch as it is one big excuse) had me laughing or gritting my teeth depending upon the paragraph. His repeated use of "brotherhood" was particularly hilarious since he's been PNG'ed and knew he would be.

So far, a lot of it was fairly vanilla and nothing more than what you could read in Fearless, Chris Kyle's book, Horse Soldiers, etc.; generic war stories that honestly aren't much different than what you can read on this and other forums.

With that said, I've hit one or two spots already (I'm not into The Mission yet) that I couldn't believe he'd write about., even in generic terms.

As to the use of a pseudonym, he's a moron. I'll say it and be candid about it. In the "Introduction" he talks about protecting himself and his teammates (sorry, the "brotherhood") and justifies the use of a _nom de guerre._ He then promptly lays out his life story with enough details you don't need to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out his real name so I think he's either a complete retard or did so for some follow-on whining or lawsuits once he was outed.

He justifies publishing the book based on the review of a "Special Operations Lawyer" (as mentioned earlier in this thread). Again, more ass-covering than concern for the "brotherhood."

It is also an airsofter's/ fan boy's wet dream with enough information about weapons and their effectiveness/ usage to spawn a number of know-it-all threads on the internet, airsoft sales, and other nonsense from the never going anywhere, never doing anything crowd.

The book is easy enough to read, but it doesn't feel polished...it feels rough, almost like the author merely transcribed a bunch of taped interviews or recollections.

Between this and Fearless you'll have a rough training outline of Green Platoon and the standards involved. Kudos for that guys...

Which brings me to my point and I'll shut up (until I finish the book): You could honestly start to pinpoint JSOC missions between this, Fearless, and reading the newspaper/ internet. Seriously. He's deliberately vague on some of the timelines (to protect the "brotherhood"), but then provides enough detail that you could start to flesh out the details or persons involved; to include CAG. Combined, the two books allow someone to start connecting the dots and I think that's probably the scariest part of all about it.


----------



## CDG (Sep 5, 2012)

Thanks for the review, Freefalling .  Interested to see what you have to say on the rest of the book.


----------



## DasBoot (Sep 5, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> There was Howard Wasdin's book from a year or two ago.
> 
> I acquired a copy of No Easy Day and am halfway through it. The opening "explanation" (calling it an Introduction would be a huge stretch as it is one big excuse) had me laughing or gritting my teeth depending upon the paragraph. His repeated use of "brotherhood" was particularly hilarious since he's been PNG'ed and knew he would be.
> 
> ...



Great review! I just started glancing through "Fearless" the other day and while I was thoroughly impressed with Chief Brown's ability to turn his life around, and despite my fan boy side eating up all the info on Green Team, I was surprised that it had been released to what seems like little to no push back from SOCOM. 

Also, I have to ask, any cool guy pictures in this book? I know I'm not the only one who flips right to the center to find the cool images lol


----------



## AWP (Sep 5, 2012)

DasBoot said:


> Great review! I just started glancing through "Fearless" the other day and while I was thoroughly impressed with Chief Brown's ability to turn his life around, and despite my fan boy side eating up all the info on Green Team, I was surprised that it had been released to what seems like little to no push back from SOCOM.
> 
> Also, I have to ask, any cool guy pictures in this book? I know I'm not the only one who flips right to the center to find the cool images lol


 
If you call only smoking crack once or twice while a SEAL, then yeah, he turned it around.

I have an electronic copy and have not seen any photos as yet.


----------



## DasBoot (Sep 5, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> If you call only smoking crack once or twice while a SEAL, then yeah, he turned it around.
> 
> I have an electronic copy and have not seen any photos as yet.


I hadn't read that- I flipped around to the parts about deployments and some of the stuff early in his life. I'm shocked they would have put that in there.


----------



## CDG (Sep 5, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> If you call only smoking crack once or twice while a SEAL, then yeah, he turned it around.


 
Yeah.... Fearless was a decent read, and maybe I'm out of line, but I was less than impressed with Chief Brown's other accomplishments in light of this.  Dude smokes crack while an operational SEAL and nothing happens to him?


----------



## AWP (Sep 5, 2012)

DasBoot said:


> I hadn't read that- I flipped around to the parts about deployments and some of the stuff early in his life. I'm shocked they would have put that in there.


 
There was at least one episode mentioned, and maybe that was it, but he was at his team, this is post-BUD/S mind you, when it happened. He disappeared for a day or two. His wife knew and I think one other SEAL knew, but I'd have to go back and re-read it before I commented any further.


----------



## CDG (Sep 5, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> There was at least one episode mentioned, and maybe that was it, but he was at his team, this is post-BUD/S mind you, when it happened. He disappeared for a day or two. His wife knew and I think one other SEAL knew, but I'd have to go back and re-read it before I commented any further.


 
Correct.  His closest friend at the time, also a SEAL, knew.  He confronted him about it, but never reported it.


----------



## TH15 (Sep 5, 2012)

I'm 99% sure it was one episode while a SEAL. If my memory serves me right, his wife threatened to take the kids with her. Something along those lines.

I really enjoyed Fearless and read it in just over a day. I'm halfway through No Easy Day. I agree with Freefalling in the review thus far. If I really wanted to I could probably dig deep to find out what operations he's talking about, but beyond that I have no clue about the specifics as far as who they were going after.


----------



## EliasBR (Sep 5, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> The consensus among the public is that SEALs do everything and are the best at everything, ever. There is no talking them out of that because the SEAL's have a PR presence that the public has invested in. Among other SOF units, I think we have a more measured opinion about the SEAL Teams. I don't hate them, I've conducted successful joint operations with SEALs, but I am aware of their limitations.


 
Sorry to ask Jacky, but I'm really curious in this one, what limitations are you talking about? could you be more specific?


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 5, 2012)

EliasBR said:


> Sorry to ask Jacky, but I'm really curious in this one, what limitations are you talking about? *could you be more specific*?


 
No.


----------



## EliasBR (Sep 5, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> No.


Ok.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 5, 2012)

I'm pretty sure a little more detail on that is in the Ebook "No easy op"


----------



## Andraste (Sep 6, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_C._Rogers_III


 
And Rogers wrote a book too.  oy


----------



## Crusader74 (Sep 6, 2012)

EliasBR said:


> Sorry to ask Jacky, but I'm really curious in this one, what limitations are you talking about? could you be more specific?


 

He is just referring to their hair gel products..can't get one that is truly strong hold....


----------



## TheSiatonist (Sep 6, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I was on the, "read this and tell me if anything is wrong with it" end, I don't know what happened before or after.


Is this thing legit?

http://www.scribd.com/doc/104652393...Pentagon-Letter-Penguin-Putnam-Bin-Laden-Book


----------



## TheSiatonist (Sep 6, 2012)

DasBoot said:


> ... Also, I have to ask, any cool guy pictures in this book? I know I'm not the only one who flips right to the center to find the cool images lol


This photo is from the book, I believe.







Came from here...


----------



## RackMaster (Sep 6, 2012)

That could be any ones closet...  lol


----------



## Salt USMC (Sep 6, 2012)

So I just saw the first copy on someone's desk today.  Im going to pick it up out of pure curiosity.  Hopefully it has cool pictures!


----------



## DasBoot (Sep 6, 2012)

Deathy McDeath said:


> So I just saw the first copy on someone's desk today. Im going to pick it up out of pure curiosity. Hopefully it has cool pictures!


It does. Lots of HAHO jumps and a few gear layout pics.



RackMaster said:


> That could be any ones closet... lol


Agreed. I mean, my closet is a lot more cluttered than that too...


----------



## AWP (Sep 6, 2012)

I made it to the Raid. UBL is dead and they are conducting the SSE. Just to add to my earlier comments, I'll try not to repeat myself:

His detail on the Maersk Alabama mission was staggering. It all made sense, and to be honest you could have guessed some of the details based on open source info, but he broke it down by number of men, the infil, how they "shaped the battlefield" for the snipers (the author was not one of the shooters), etc.

He described the place where they trained for the UBL mission with enough detail that you could probably find it using Google maps.

He had one brief passage early in the book about how CAG worked Iraq and DEVGRU worked Afghanistan... a "That is their turf, this is our turf." explanation.

His level of detail on the raid is substantial. "This was Plan A, this was Plan B, my team would do this and then move here, so-and-so's team would clear this and move there" kind of stuff. He even broke that down by numbers of men per assault element, methods of breaching, and even described the team tasked with outside security/ keeping onlookers away.

Though we covered it earlier in this thread, when you read the portion on the raid he makes it perfectly clear: the bad guys had unsuppressed weapons and the good guys used suppressed weapons and it was a suppressed weapon that shot UBL....before he and one other stood over the body and fired more rounds into it. Some uber-Che loving type of attorney could make a name for himself over those details if he wanted to. Kudos to the author for opening that door...

IMO, it will be a sad day in America if the DoD doesn't attempt to prosecute this guy.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 6, 2012)

Thanks for the review.

A little off topic, but I've read some chagrin over the fact that the POTUS/his people spilled beans. There is no hypocricy and no inconsistency. That's the way it should be. It is emphatically the province of the POTUS (at least in this case) to say what gets released, when, how and most importantly, by who. No mere foot soldier, even after discharge, should be doing so, especially after agreeing by contract not to (without pre-publication preview.

Nor is there any question about whether secrets were in the book or not. The author doesn't get to decide that. Unless there is a "no harm, no foul" clause in the contract, this shit should not be decided after the fact in the public sphere.

If Pepsi proposes and then executes and markets a new product, and assigns the PR Department the task to disimenate the information, and conduct the advertising afterwards, the engineer who designed it should STFU, especially if he signed a non-disclosure agreement. Pepsi can do as they will. This may be a weak analogy for some reason I haven't thought of, but for those who want government run like a business it might hold some water.

(P.S.  Okay, yes, I will go search for a spell check function)


----------



## Chopstick (Sep 6, 2012)

FWIW I was just at Target(no pun intended) and they have the booked marked down already.


----------



## RackMaster (Sep 6, 2012)

Chopstick said:


> FWIW I was just at Target(no pun intended) and they have the booked marked down already.


 
Trying to make some money before it's ordered pulled from the shelves.


----------



## Chopstick (Sep 6, 2012)

RackMaster said:


> Trying to make some money before it's ordered pulled from the shelves.


I thought it was interesting that it was placed on the bottom of the book rack too.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 6, 2012)

So, if the author wants to join this site . . . ?  :-/


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 6, 2012)

RackMaster said:


> Trying to make some money before it's ordered pulled from the shelves.


 
Pulled, it is being pulled? or do you mean just based of the possibility?


----------



## Konan (Sep 6, 2012)

RackMaster said:


> Trying to make some money before it's ordered pulled from the shelves.


 
It won't be pulled from the shelves.
The publishers will be have investigated every avenue of publication, prior to commencing the printing of the book, as their outlay would have been substantial.
I expect that the author's agent has already sold the international and foreign language rights also. So there will be thousands of copies printed all over the world.


----------



## DasBoot (Sep 6, 2012)

Books-A-Million had it right at the entrance. And 40% off. I concur that they're trying to sell this first batch off ASAP. Most people will walk and throw money at the cashier for it too so I'd say it's a smart business move.


----------



## Crusader74 (Sep 6, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> I made it to the Raid. UBL is dead and they are conducting the SSE. Just to add to my earlier comments, I'll try not to repeat myself:
> 
> His detail on the Maersk Alabama mission was staggering. It all made sense, and to be honest you could have guessed some of the details based on open source info, but he broke it down by number of men, the infil, how they "shaped the battlefield" for the snipers (the author was not one of the shooters), etc.
> 
> ...


 

So in essence, he wrote the book like giving a debrief post mission?


----------



## AWP (Sep 6, 2012)

Irish said:


> So in essence, he wrote the book like giving a debrief post mission?


 
Pretty much.

Oh, two awesome parts I forgot to mention:

He describes how the team members were selected. I vaguely recall lines like "DEVGRU had men available" or something to that effect in the media after the raid. "Available" can also mean, if the book is to be believed, that they were recalling guys from leave, "Get your ass down here" type pages and that the ones choses to go were all senior guys from DEVGRU. They even picked up a guy in Afghanistan who had never done any of the pre-mission prep. They briefed him in Jalalabad, basically "You're our Arabic speaker. Welcome to the team." Apparently, CAG was flat busted with no one around to kill the most wanted man on the planet...

What was even MORE awesome than that was "the mulch guy." The author was having some mulch put in at his house and the mulch guy asked if he was with the Teams. Yup. "Figures, you look like one." Then he asked if the author knew "Jay" which the author did because that was his Squadron commander. The mulch guy goes on to say, "Yeah, he's been real busy in DC for a few weeks." The author didn't know anything about it and wondered how the mulch guy knew his boss was in DC for several weeks while guys were on leave.

The whole segment was odd.


----------



## Crusader74 (Sep 6, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> Pretty much.
> 
> Oh, two awesome parts I forgot to mention:
> 
> ...


 

Well, the horse has well and truly bolted now....


----------



## Crusader74 (Sep 6, 2012)

FYI, This made Irish Media, reporting his real name.. Made broadsheets as well as rags..


----------



## Chopstick (Sep 6, 2012)

Mulch man?  That reminds me of the smoking man from the X files.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 6, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> Pretty much.
> 
> Oh, two awesome parts I forgot to mention:
> 
> ...


 
the mulch guy thing really makes no sense.
Like so he just looks at him and goes, oh you must be Team guy? strange.


----------



## Brian1/75 (Sep 6, 2012)

KBar666 said:


> the mulch guy thing really makes no sense.
> Like so he just looks at him and goes, oh you must be Team guy? strange.


Too many guys sporting the 'look.' I tried to avoid it like the plague.


----------



## AWP (Sep 6, 2012)

KBar666 said:


> the mulch guy thing really makes no sense.
> Like so he just looks at him and goes, oh you must be Team guy? strange.


 
I think his point was "How does this guy know more about what's going on than me?" but maybe he was being vague...for the "brotherhood" and everything. According to the book, several of the Team guys used this dude for yardwork or whatever and he knew all of their comings and goings. Beyond that dialogue, the author hasn't mentioned it again.

And he was dumb enough to believe a pseudonym would hide his identity when the local unvetted mulch guy knows his schedule and most of his Team?

I keep shaking my head as I read the book.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 6, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> . . .  several of the Team guys used this dude for yardwork . . .


 
I'll bet 007, 008 and 009 use different law mowers, maids and pool boys for just this reason.  We could learn so much from the Brits.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 6, 2012)

Wow.  I don't mean any disrespect to anyone at all.

But if I may say, using the same mulch guy, apparently quite often seems rather stupid for just that reason.

But than again, it is probally one of those overlooked things.  What I mean is, I doubt everyone sits around at a table and divies up who they use and for what.  "nope sorry hes already my mulch man.   Sorry this plumber is taken.  That cable is being used by bob"  lol


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 6, 2012)

Brian1/75 said:


> Too many guys sporting the 'look.' I tried to avoid it like the plague.


 
I think I understand what your getting at and what you mean/how that could happen.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 6, 2012)

KBar666 said:


> Wow. I don't mean any disrespect to anyone at all.
> 
> But if I may say, using the same mulch guy, apparently quite often seems rather stupid for just that reason.
> 
> But than again, it is probally one of those overlooked things. What I mean is, I doubt everyone sits around at a table and divies up who they use and for what. "nope sorry hes already my mulch man. Sorry this plumber is taken. That cable is being used by bob" lol


You never ask a friend to recommend a reputable buisnessman/woman?  Hey, I need some mulch dropped on my trees; use this guy, he's reliable.  The guy is wrong if he didn't go to a security manager and pass the conversation on to him/her.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 6, 2012)

SEAL charity turns down sellout's money.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...-turns-down-proceeds-from-bin-laden-book?lite


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 6, 2012)

SOWT said:


> You never ask a friend to recommend a reputable buisnessman/woman? Hey, I need some mulch dropped on my trees; use this guy, he's reliable. The guy is wrong if he didn't go to a security manager and pass the conversation on to him/her.


 
True.

Guess I was overthinking the whole thing. LOL


----------



## Konan (Sep 7, 2012)

So now I have to watch the mulch guy as well as the gardner and the milkman?


----------



## TheSiatonist (Sep 7, 2012)

OK ... I was kinda thinking the author of this email is Mr. "Owen" himself.  Your thoughts?

http://sofrep.com/11055/jack-murphy-lands-on-seal-team-sixs-target-deck/



> _E-mail received from an active duty SEAL Team Six operator:_
> I will admit right up front that I am biased, having spent more time at DevGru than Jack Murphy spent in the military. That said I do take exception to your article “Next Time Send Delta or the Rangers”. I find it humorous that you choose to comment on it at all, never having been at a Tier 1 unit.
> 
> First I will give credit where credit is due.  Delta is one of two (the other being DevGru) of the most hard core and prolific group of warriors ever assembled in the history of warfare.  And Rangers are the premier Light Infantry unit in the world.
> ...


 
Read more here...


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 7, 2012)

TheSiatonist said:


> OK ... I was kinda thinking the author of this email is Mr. "Owen" himself. Your thoughts?
> 
> http://sofrep.com/11055/jack-murphy-lands-on-SEAL-team-sixs-target-deck/
> 
> ...


 
I don't think it is "Owen".    Webb says he knows the author personally and calls him by his real first name in the response" I happen to like Matt..." he says, so no. My thoughts are its not him, as that would mean hes (Webb)  talking about him in the third person/as if hes not the one reading it.


----------



## Konan (Sep 7, 2012)

Desperado said:


> I'll bet 007, 008 and 009 use different law mowers, maids and pool boys for just this reason. We could learn so much from the Brits.


 
Secret Service cut-backs...Miss Moneypenny and Q do all that now.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 7, 2012)

KBar666 said:


> I don't think it is "Owen". Webb says he knows the author personally and calls him by his real first name in the response" I happen to like Matt..." he says, so no. My thoughts are its not him, as that would mean hes (Webb) talking about him in the third person/as if hes not the one reading it.


 
No, it isn't Matt.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 7, 2012)

TheSiatonist said:


> OK ... I was kinda thinking the author of this email is Mr. "Owen" himself. Your thoughts?
> 
> http://sofrep.com/11055/jack-murphy-lands-on-SEAL-team-sixs-target-deck/
> 
> ...


Individual is clueless when it comes to the Rangers and others.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 7, 2012)

Clueless and immature in my opinion, but I decided to let his e-mail to me speak for itself.


----------



## AWP (Sep 7, 2012)

Finished the book. I found some points hilarious, particularly in light of this thread and the media blitz around everything SEAL-related:



> "It is imperative that we stay out of the media," Jay said. "Let's all make sure we're keeping a low profile." I was astonished. We'd kept this whole thing under wraps for weeks. Now, Washington was leaking everything, and we were going to get the lecture for it. It felt like it was only a matter of time before some of our names appeared on the news. We just killed the number one terrorist in the world. The last thing we needed was our names attached to it. We simply wanted to fade back into the shadows and go back to work.


 
Not long after, he totally justifies the book and we should get off his back.



> Since May 1, 2011, everyone from President Obama to Admiral McRaven has given interviews about the operation. If my commander in chief is willing to talk, then I feel comfortable doing the same.


 
So there you have it, copied verbatim from the book. I think any further thoughts I have on this topic are so negative that I don't wish to put them out there. I will say that this whole affair, everything surrounding the raid and SEALs in the media is an abortion, an out-of-control, no-end-in-sight abortion. The only good news in any of this is that UBL is dead.


----------



## Deadpool (Sep 7, 2012)

Guys, I actually finished the book - and keep in mind, I'm just another hopeful I have no affiliation whatsoever (and that's why I'm asking this) Was the Author, Mark or Matt whichever you prefer, considered to be a respected Operator within the community before this went down? 

Jack, from the way Brandon talked about him - it seemed that the author is actually a pretty nice guy and was a good operator, is there any truth to this?


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 7, 2012)

Yes, he was a respected member of ST6 prior to publishing this book although he has something of a fall from grace that led to them letting him go.


----------



## AWP (Sep 7, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> a fall from grace that led to them letting him go.


 
PNG'ed or leaving the unit? I only ask because the book's version of him leaving the unit and Navy is vastly different than the above

EDIT: Or are my wires crossed between "Owen" and the email author in the article above?


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 7, 2012)

I'm talking about Matt/Mark.  He was fired from ST6.  That said, everyone we have consulted with had a very high opinion of him as a SEAL.


----------



## Crusader74 (Sep 7, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> I'm talking about Matt/Mark. He was fired from ST6. That said, everyone we have consulted with had a very high opinion of him as a SEAL.


 

Should he have not returned to his original Team after 6 ? or did they not want him either?


----------



## AWP (Sep 7, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> I'm talking about Matt/Mark. He was fired from ST6. That said, everyone we have consulted with had a very high opinion of him as a SEAL.


 
In his book he decides to leave to focus on his personal life and recounts a meeting with the DEVGRU commander:
"What can we do to keep you?"
"It's time for me to move on," I said. He then says he was tired and ready for something new.


----------



## Deadpool (Sep 7, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> I'm talking about Matt/Mark.  He was fired from ST6.  That said, everyone we have consulted with had a very high opinion of him as a SEAL.



I don't mean to intrude on his life, or be a nuisance but he was PNG'd because of his desire to go elsewhere - or rather move on? Am I right? And if so, your theory (which I believe and it makes a lot of sense) would be true. That being, the guy felt betrayed by his own unit, he wasn't on good terms with them and someone offered him a ton of money to tell his story. 

Is it that common within Tier 1 units for guys to be PNG'd for simply wanting to move on?


----------



## RackMaster (Sep 7, 2012)

Every one gets "bored" or "tired" of doing the same old job after a while, even in such "high speed" jobs such as a SEAL.  Some times you just have to move on but that doesn't mean that you sell your story, including secrets to the highest bidder.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 7, 2012)

I have no idea what happened in the unit, or under what conditions the author left ST6 or the Navy, but I do know that "I decided to move on" always sounds better than "I got fired."


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 7, 2012)

Full disclosure: I was once fired from a job I held in the Army.  Shit happens.  I moved on and was moved over to a leadership position in a Rifle platoon in my Ranger Battalion.  No use feeling sorry for yourself, I think it was the best thing that ever happened to me.  My point is that those of us who did the job long enough have some shit in our past that we are not so proud of.  I wish Matt was a little more candid about it but what can you do.  The fact is, Matt was given a plane ticket home to Virginia while Six was out on a training exercise and basically told to kick rocks, your kit bag is out in the hall.  This may very well have led to some antagonism between Matt and his unit.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 7, 2012)

I found this comment interesting: "Ask your CAG friends about the highest profile Op they’ve done lately… and you’ll hear the crickets chirping loudly."

Imagine if we lived in a world where your CAG (or DevGru) friends didn't tell you what they've done lately.  A multi-cell structure *within* the community can be a good thing.  KITDFOHS.  It is being done, but apparently not in the DOD side of the house.  Maybe it's easy to ask your friends.  Maybe DOD is chosen for high profile Ops for high profile reasons.

I love crickets.  It' when they stop chirping  . . ..

Anyway, I'm losing interest in this drama and can only say I hope lessons are learned.  :-/


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 7, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> Full disclosure: I was once fired from a job I held in the Army. Shit happens. I moved on and was moved over to a leadership position in a Rifle platoon in my Ranger Battalion. No use feeling sorry for yourself, I think it was the best thing that ever happened to me. My point is that those of us who did the job long enough have some shit in our past that we are not so proud of. I wish Matt was a little more candid about it but what can you do. The fact is, Matt was given a plane ticket home to Virginia while Six was out on a training exercise and basically told to kick rocks, your kit bag is out in the hall. This may very well have led to some antagonism between Matt and his unit.


 
The difference is, some people (like you) man up and take their lumps and end up the better for it, while others get a self-entitled chip on their shoulder.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 7, 2012)

Haha!  I got a chip on my shoulder, I just don't feel entitled!  I'm also not interested in dragging my boys through the mud just because I feel like writing a book for cold hard cash.


----------



## AWP (Sep 7, 2012)

This story keeps "improving..."

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/07/16018/?hpt=hp_t3



> The head of U.S. special operations has contacted members of the covert Navy SEAL team that killed Osama bin Laden to reconfirm some details of the al Qaeda leader's last moments conveyed in a new book, and military officials have concluded the author's account was not accurate, CNN has learned.
> 
> McRaven, the head of U.S. Special Operations Command, went back to the team - including the lead SEAL, or "point man" - in recent days to make sure Bissonnette did not have any information they did not know about.


 
At this rate, we're going to have to add the book to the recommended fiction thread.


----------



## 275ANGER! (Sep 7, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> He had one brief passage early in the book about how CAG worked Iraq and DEVGRU worked Afghanistan... a "That is their turf, this is our turf." explanation.


 
I am guessing he didn't really explain how that came about... I was in IZ working under NSW and there was some RUMINT going around. 



TheSiatonist said:


> Your thoughts?
> http://sofrep.com/11055/jack-murphy-lands-on-SEAL-team-sixs-target-deck/
> Read more here...


 
Jack has the author of the email been vetted? Sounds like something a "fan" would write. Either way it is always funny to hear from someone who doesn't think their shit don't stink.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 7, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> This story keeps "improving..."
> 
> http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/07/16018/?hpt=hp_t3
> 
> ...


 

Sounds like the DoD is coming up with reasons not to prosecute.  "Well, we *would* prosecute, but you know, the story isn't true anyway."


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 7, 2012)

He was one of Brandon's students when he was an instructor as the SEAL's sniper course.  In regards to "No Easy Day"...contrary to what the media is reporting, the book does not deviate from the script in any significant way.  Yes, there is a different perspective from the official story because Matt was there on a tactical level but the main thrust of the White House/Pentagon/CIA narrative is upheld by this book.  The only disputes are rather superficial when it comes down to it, who was doing what in which room at what time sort of stuff.  The full story is still a long ways off from being revealed.


----------



## Chopstick (Sep 7, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> Sounds like the DoD is coming up with reasons not to prosecute. "Well, we *would* prosecute, but you know, the story isn't true anyway."


So does that mean its a case of Stolen Valor?


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 7, 2012)

They won't prosecute because if Matt wrote a real "tell all" just about non-class stuff he knows about his former unit it would be an absolute disaster.  If they really come after him, especially with jail time, then blackmail is going to be a simple reality in this equation.


----------



## Brian1/75 (Sep 7, 2012)

I just picked it up. The green team bit was interesting. I'm getting a bit tired of the war stories though. I'm about positive my buddy got pulled to be the RTO for their troop in IZ based off the dates and locations. I'd have to get a hold of him and ask.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 7, 2012)

So what is the verdict by now, did he or did he not reveal shit he should not have.  Please note I'm not asking for specifics on what it is.  Just asking if he they do have grounds to go after him criminally in this regard.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 7, 2012)

He definitely violated NDA's that he signed, but it seems that the only way you can hurt someone with an NDA is if you curl it into a cone and poke them in the eye with it.  NDA's are not stopping anyone from doing anything.  Based on the excerpts I've heard on this forum out of the book, he definitely wrote about some things that I think should have been held back, but what is and is not OPSEC is something that the appropriate authorities will have to determine.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 7, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> He definitely violated NDA's that he signed, but it seems that the only way you can hurt someone with an NDA is if you curl it into a cone and poke them in the eye with it. NDA's are not stopping anyone from doing anything. Based on the excerpts I've heard on this forum out of the book, he definitely wrote about some things that I think should have been held back, but what is and is not OPSEC is something that the appropriate authorities will have to determine.


 
That being said I just got the book today, and only recently started to pick up.  Granted first thing I did was through the pics.  There are two sets.   One of what I'll call just simple cool guy shots,  HAHO jumps, weapons, etc. 

The other section
Is a whole set of diagrams detailing the raid to the letter.
People,the approches, etc.  all that stuff.
Practically every action is broken down systematically.

IMHO I don;t think something like this should be included and I haven't even started the real reading yet.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 8, 2012)

I think that kind of detail is historically important, but not now, in like 20+ years.


----------



## Konan (Sep 8, 2012)

There's only so many ways to assault a building, depending on the strength and security of the structure itself, how many levels there are, how many people you have, what breaching equipment you have, how many people you think they have, what sort of defensive equipment you think they have.
I don't think posting up diagrams of the means of entry and action scenario is anything to get excited about.
Any SWAT team in the world would be able provide a similar set of plans.

Lot of people who don't know the author seem very quick to judge him.
Assuming he didn't mention (for example only) the XXX secret observation drones that spied on the compound for weeks befiore the attack, or the real names and addresses of his team mates, I don't see that OPSEC would have been violated in any way.
I mean ten seconds after the event your own President and any politician who thought they were entitled to five minutes of fame were all over the news/air and internet blabbering away about the mission to anyone who cared to listen.

I was hearing the same OPSEC violated stuff when Chris Ryan and Andy McNab wrote their first non-fiction novels. Andy even had to attend a court to dispute the MOD's claims that he had written things he should not have.
Storm in a tea-cup. Nothing came of it, now both Chris and Andy are well known authors and respected members of the international security/protection community.

The one thing I'm dubious about is the SEAL author getting the cold shoulder simply because he stated that he had decided to leave the Teams and start a civilian business.
Surely friends and team mates would be wishing him the best of luck with his change of lifestyle?


----------



## Konan (Sep 8, 2012)

How does one edit a post after one has made it, by the way?
I do so abore spelling msitakes, especially when I make them.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 8, 2012)

Konan said:


> The one thing I'm dubious about is the SEAL author getting the cold shoulder simply because he stated that he had decided to leave the Teams and start a civilian business.
> Surely friends and team mates would be wishing him the best of luck with his change of lifestyle?


 
There is more to it than that.  We have been leaving the door open so that Matt can step in and clarify the situation for himself and because we don't want to throw him under the bus.


----------



## Worldweaver (Sep 8, 2012)

Konan said:


> There's only so many ways to assault a building, depending on the strength and security of the structure itself, how many levels there are, how many people you have, what breaching equipment you have, how many people you think they have, what sort of defensive equipment you think they have.
> I don't think posting up diagrams of the means of entry and action scenario is anything to get excited about.
> Any SWAT team in the world would be able provide a similar set of plans.


 
Well SWAT teams are not Tier 1 assets that conduct low/secret profile operations in other countries. There are plenty of ways to assault any type of structure but that doesn't mean it needs laid out in a book that may or may not give insight into specific TTP's.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 8, 2012)

Konan said:


> How does one edit a post after one has made it, by the way?
> I do so abore spelling msitakes, especially when I make them.


 
You have to be verified to do that, either through proven military service or as a civilian.


----------



## Brian1/75 (Sep 8, 2012)

Worldweaver said:


> Well SWAT teams are Tier 1 assets that conduct low/secret profile operations in other countries. There are plenty of ways to assault any type of structure but that doesn't mean it needs laid out in a book that may or may not give insight into specific TTP's.


I personally think mentioning dual-breach top-down, bottom-up is a specific TTP. It's certainly not a common SWAT tactic. He over and over mentions how they went from landing on the X, breach and bum rush, to offset and slow and meticulous movement through a target. He never mentions the Blackhawks were stealth birds, but we know this from other sources and he literally plots out the flight path on a map, the linger time on mission, and the location of the FARP. Now someone can figure out if the range is similar to a standard Blackhawk. I don't think he's going to get anybody killed, but he certainly violated OPSEC. Foreign intelligence agencies have more sources than they did before. It's the little details from many sources that add up to a big picture. I'm not making a judgement of Matt, just pointing out what stuck out to me.


----------



## pardus (Sep 8, 2012)

Why is there even debate about this?

What part of 'Non Disclosure' is difficult?


----------



## CDG (Sep 8, 2012)

pardus said:


> Why is there even debate about this?
> 
> What part of 'Non Disclosure' is difficult?


 
I agreed this post so hard.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 8, 2012)

CDG said:


> I agreed this post so hard.


 
Agreed.  And since when did "My Boss exercised privilege so I must have that privilege too" become sound reasoning?   

Kind of reminds me of "But mom, she did it too!"


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 8, 2012)

Brian1/75 said:


> I personally think mentioning dual-breach top-down, bottom-up is a specific TTP. It's certainly not a common SWAT tactic. He over and over mentions how they went from landing on the X, breach and bum rush, to offset and slow and meticulous movement through a target. He never mentions the Blackhawks were stealth birds, but we know this from other sources and he literally plots out the flight path on a map, the linger time on mission, and the location of the FARP. Now someone can figure out if the range is similar to a standard Blackhawk. I don't think he's going to get anybody killed, but he certainly violated OPSEC. Foreign intelligence agencies have more sources than they did before. It's the little details from many sources that add up to a big picture. I'm not making a judgement of Matt, just pointing out what stuck out to me.


 
This is sorta what I was getting at in my post before. Agreed.


----------



## Ravage (Sep 9, 2012)

Intertesting. Aparently photos of his own gear ware posted by NRA not long after the raid:


----------



## Poccington (Sep 9, 2012)

Konan said:


> I was hearing the same OPSEC violated stuff when Chris Ryan and Andy McNab wrote their first non-fiction novels. Andy even had to attend a court to dispute the MOD's claims that he had written things he should not have.
> Storm in a tea-cup. Nothing came of it, now both Chris and Andy are well known authors and respected members of the international security/protection community.


 
Well many people, upto and including their old RSM, would argue that McNab and Ryan's non-fiction novels, specifically Bravo Two Zero, were quite the work of fiction.


----------



## Konan (Sep 9, 2012)

Poccington said:


> Well many people, upto and including their old RSM, would argue that McNab and Ryan's non-fiction novels, specifically Bravo Two Zero, were quite the work of fiction.


 
Sure. Par for the course for author's of NF these days to make dull and boring incidents more 'glossy.'

Peter Radcliffe's comments regarding Bravo Two Zero are tainted as well.
If  I recall he makes a big deal about Andy refusing to consider using a Landie.
That wasn't just Andy's choice, the whole team held a Crow's Parliment before they went off.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 9, 2012)

Anyone Catch the interview tonight on 60 mins?  I managed to catch it.  I found some stuff interesting.   For example a few things he says even contradicts small little details in the book.


I also found it interesting how he said that those who know him are behind him for writing the book, when everywhere else it seems like they are actually mad he wrote it.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 9, 2012)

As I understood it, the major issue with McNab was that he implied that the dead men were to blame for the mission going tits up.

I don't think the carrot will work in stopping this flow of books. The way the UK MOD sorted it out was with the stick- they told them to sign the agreement saying 'no books' or they'd be sent back to their old unit. The SEALs could send them to the fleet I suppose, maybe the cheffing school, ha.


----------



## goon175 (Sep 9, 2012)

You can't send someone who is no longer in the military "back to the fleet". The problem is not with AD types, but rather those who have already ETS'd/retired.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 10, 2012)

Of course you can't, but it stops it down the track. Which is what I've said, no?


----------



## goon175 (Sep 10, 2012)

They already sign an NDA, getting them to sign something isn't the problem, it's enforcement of what they sign that's the problem.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 10, 2012)

No but it contractually and specifically says "no books" not just a general NDA. What I mean is, the wiggle room in a general NDA can be massive, if you put down a blanket statement it makes things much less wriggarable.


----------



## Unstoppable (Sep 10, 2012)

Here's something thats been bugging me, if his real name has been plastered all over the internet, what exactly is going to happen with this guys friends and family? Wouldn't they be in some sort of danger? I would imagine AQ is chomping at the bits to get at this guy.


----------



## Chopstick (Sep 10, 2012)

In all the football fun last night I forgot this was airing on 60 Minutes.   Anyone watch it?  Thoughts?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...cid=maing-grid7|aim|dl1|sec1_lnk2&pLid=203173


----------



## dknob (Sep 10, 2012)

I thought the 60 Minutes interview was very well done. The guy is very likeable.


----------



## Crusader74 (Sep 10, 2012)

dknob said:


> I thought the 60 Minutes interview was very well done. *The guy is very likeable*.


 
I'm sure a lot of his former Team mates will disagree....


----------



## Centermass (Sep 10, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> No but it contractually and specifically says "no books" not just a general NDA. What I mean is, the wiggle room in a general NDA can be massive, if you put down a blanket statement it makes things much less wriggarable.


 
Last time I checked, it was pretty damn specific - especially for someone with his level of clearance knew full well and chose to do otherwise.

He broke the faith, not once, but twice. First against that contained in the NDA, and second, more importantly, to those still walking the walk.  

Guess in this day and age, it's ok to pick and choose what you agreed to and what you decided to take back.  Seems it's getting harder and harder to find someone that can actually keep their mouths shut and not so hard to find those willing to give guys like these a pass.

If I ever met the guy, I'd thank him for his service first and then let him know how he lost my respect at the same time.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 10, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> No but it contractually and specifically says "no books" not just a general NDA. What I mean is, the wiggle room in a general NDA can be massive, if you put down a blanket statement it makes things much less wriggarable.


He probably signed the same NDA I signed, which specifically covered books and other manuscripts.  He violated the NDA.


----------



## dknob (Sep 10, 2012)

Based on the interview alone, there was no sensitive or important information disclosed. I'm picking up the book today. But aside from simply exploiting his SMU time, the whole major OPSEC violation stuff has come out to be nothing but some huplah.


----------



## Ravage (Sep 10, 2012)

For those that missed it:


----------



## AWP (Sep 10, 2012)

Unstoppable said:


> Here's something thats been bugging me, if his real name has been plastered all over the internet, what exactly is going to happen with this guys friends and family? Wouldn't they be in some sort of danger? I would imagine AQ is chomping at the bits to get at this guy.


 
So what? He should have thought about that before he ran his mouth. He endangered them, not the media.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 10, 2012)

I saw the book at the Hastings check out counter but had no desire to pick it up; not because of the ethical issues involved; I just don't have the interest I guess.  Besides, after my inquiry, my son said there was no chapter in the table of contents entitled "How DevGru Puts on Their Pants in the Morning" so at that point I paid for my DVD rental of NCIS Season 9 (after all these years I'm still hoping to catch a glimpse of Abby Sciuto's panties).


----------



## dknob (Sep 10, 2012)

It would be nieve to think that AQ has the capabilities to infiltrate an assassin into the US to kill him.

Any danger would come from a home grown militant islamist/ Lone wolf deal.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 10, 2012)

dknob said:


> Based on the interview alone, there was no sensitive or important information disclosed. I'm picking up the book today. But aside from simply exploiting his SMU time, the whole major OPSEC violation stuff has come out to be nothing but some huplah.


 
How do you know what is sensitive and what isn't when it comes to something like this?  Do you have training as a security manager for SOCOM?

Additionally, just because it's not classified, doesn't mean it is OK to release.  By definition, "OPSEC" covers operations at the UNCLASS level.  That's why it's "OPSEC" and not "INTSEC."  The NDAs which we ALL had to sign to have a clearance, which is required to be in units like he was in, doesn't say "I will only disclose things that I think are OK to disclose, or if I can rationalize it to where someone higher than me released it first, or if I need to "set the record straight"  (see also "Dalton Fury")  or if I really, really want to make a buck."  That fact that he did this AT ALL is a violation of his word of honor and a betrayal to the community to which he formerly belonged.


----------



## dknob (Sep 10, 2012)

Of course he violated all his agreements.

But in my opinion his violations don't threaten national security, his teammates, or our current capabilities on the ground.

His chapters on Green Team/Selection might help some aspiring Sixers get a headsup on what to expect more so then any other books that cover it, but if they are on the Teams I'm sure they know plenty about the course.


----------



## surgicalcric (Sep 10, 2012)

dknob said:


> It would be nieve to think that AQ has the capabilities to infiltrate an assassin into the US to kill him.
> 
> Any danger would come from a home grown militant islamist/ Lone wolf deal.


 
Nieve like thinking they could never infiltrate enough guys into the US to conduct a large scale attack on US soil?  ;)


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 10, 2012)

surgicalcric said:


> Nieve like thinking they could never infiltrate enough guys into the US to conduct a large scale attack on US soil? ;)


 
lol

In all seriousness, if someone would have written a novel in say 1998 about fictional events that unfolded exactly the same way 9/11 did, I would have called BS.

"Let me get this straight.  A dude living in a cave in Afghanistan successfully planned a mission in which a bunch of foreign-born terrorists come to the US, live here for years, take flight lessons (learning only how to fly, not how to land), and remain true to their extremist beliefs while living the American life of drinking, strip clubs, and drugs.  Then, on a specific day, at a specific time, they hijack a bunch of planes inside the US, using only box cutters, and then crash them into the Pentagon and the Twin Towers.  Then the Twin Tower both collapse.  And then the US invades (and occupies, wtf) not only Afghanistan, but Iraq.  And the US intel community never caught wind of any of this in advance?  Riiiiight." ;)

Sometimes truth really is stranger than fiction.


----------



## Brooklynben (Sep 10, 2012)

ADMIN EDIT: We're not going to publish links like that here.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 10, 2012)

goon175 said:


> They already sign an NDA, getting them to sign something isn't the problem, it's enforcement of what they sign that's the problem.


 
Yup, NDA's are worthless.  They are not stopping anyone from doing anything.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 10, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> "A dude living in a cave in Afghanistan successfully planned a mission in which a bunch of foreign-born terrorists come to the US, live here for years, take flight lessons (learning only how to fly, not how to land), and remain true to their extremist beliefs while living the American life of drinking, strip clubs, and drugs. Then, on a specific day, at a specific time, they hijack a bunch of planes inside the US, using only box cutters, and then crash them into the Pentagon and the Twin Towers. Then the Twin Tower both collapse. And then the US invades (and occupies, wtf) not only Afghanistan, but Iraq. And the US intel community never caught wind of any of this in advance? Riiiiight."


 
It's still not safe to objectively discuss the rhetorical extensions of what you just wrote.

Thus, I'll quickly change the subject, and go slightly off topic, to ask if any one remembers the plane that went down somewhere in or around NYC some days or weeks shortly after 9/11, and all the anthrax shit?  Those were strange days indeed.  Was that plane crash proven to have been an accident?  And the anthrax is still unsolved, or?  I almost feel like there has been a collective amnesia.  On the other hand, I killed my T.V. years ago so I'm kind of out of the loop.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 10, 2012)

Desperado said:


> It's still not safe to objectively discuss the rhetorical extensions of what you just wrote.
> 
> ...


 
I'm pretty sure everything I just wrote was covered in the officially-released 9/11 Report.  So in what way is it "not safe to objectively discuss?"


----------



## Desperado (Sep 10, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I'm pretty sure everything I just wrote was covered in the officially-released 9/11 Report. So in what way is it "not safe to objectively discuss?"


 
Let's just say that if some devil's advocate, me for instance, were to objectively discuss one or more of the rhetorical extensions what you just wrote, I'd probably get banned. Maybe I should have phrased it thus: "It's still not *politically* safe to objectively discuss the rhetorical extensions of what you just wrote." Then it might have been more clear. I actually thought about adding that word in the first place, but found the sentence unwieldy.  [Although there is a certain meter to it.]


----------



## surgicalcric (Sep 10, 2012)

Desperado said:


> Let's just say that if some devil's advocate, me for instance, were to objectively discuss one or more of the rhetorical extensions what you just wrote, I'd probably get banned.


 

Bullshit....


----------



## Desperado (Sep 10, 2012)

surgicalcric said:


> Bullshit....


 
Maybe, but as the new kid on the block, I'll stand down and see if some other soul, braver than I, will pursue one of those extensions.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 10, 2012)

How long have you been a member of this site?  My current avatar notwithstanding, we don't ban people here for effectively and logically arguing a point of view, even if it goes against something a member of the staff says.  Especially if that someone is me.  So I don't understand what you're implying, but it's starting to piss me off.  Say what you mean and start making sense, or drop the subject.


----------



## CDG (Sep 10, 2012)

Desperado said:


> Maybe, but as the new kid on the block, I'll stand down and see if some other soul, braver than I, will pursue one of those extensions.


 
Are you just going to make veiled references to your "objective extensions", or are you actually going to present an argument?


----------



## Desperado (Sep 10, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> . . .  or drop the subject.


 
I did.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 10, 2012)

OK fine.  Issue over, returning to the original subject of this thread.


----------



## dknob (Sep 10, 2012)

Well I greatly enjoyed the book.


----------



## Ravage (Sep 11, 2012)

http://www.humanevents.com/2012/09/10/pfarrer-bissonnette-did-shot-bin-laden/

The retired Navy SEAL officer, and author of “SEAL Target Geronimo: The Inside Story of the Mission to Kill Osama bin Laden,” in an exclusive interview with Human Events, said inconsistencies in Matt Bissonnette’s memoirs of the raid on Bin Laden tell him Bisonette was not part of the entry team that shot Bin Laden.
In connection with the release of his book, Bissonnette, writing under the name Mark Owen, gave a lengthy interview on the CBS “60 Minutes” program, complete with a scale model of the Abbottabad compound.

After watching the “60 Minutes” interview and reading “No Easy Day,” Chuck Pfarrer, a former commander of the Naval Special Warfare Development Group, known as SEAL Team 6, the same team credited with the May 2 raid on Bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, said he is unconvinced and confused.
Bisonette’s description of coming up the stairs to the third floor and killing Bin Laden’s son Kalid Laden and then reaching Bin Laden himself does not make sense, he said.

The Pakistanis say Kalid was shot from a higher position, he said. Two bullets hit him above the eyes that came out at the bottom of the back of his head. “There were no foot prints in the blood on the stairs,” he said. No one came up the stairs past Kalid on to the third floor.
“I am convinced he was not part of the entry team,” he said.

An equally glaring falsehood in Bissonnette’s book, “No Easy Day,” involved how and when the entry team reached Bin Laden and the book’s bizarre account of the helicopter crash, Pfarrer said.

Bissonnette claims the Black Hawk carrying the insertion team crashed upon its approach on one of the interior walls in the compound, he said. There is no way the Black Hawk landed with its tail on the wall with front and back rotors continuing to spin as the assault team members and flight crew egressed for the mission without rotors hitting the ground or personnel.

“An object 77 feet, six inches perched on a 15-foot wall would certainly have a rotor strike,” he said.
“It is simple trigonometry.”

“Saying that this thing landed with its tail on the wall and its nose in the dirt and that miraculously — and he uses that word, didn’t have a rotor strike, that is completely implausible,” he said.

Pfarrer said he cannot understand why Bissonnette would make up key parts of the story.
“I honestly don’t know what the motivation could be,” he said.

“Let’s not even talk about my sources, Mohamed Bashir, Bin Laden’s closest neighbor, said he saw the helicopter land on the roof and he saw people jump out of the helicopter off the roof into the third floor terrace,” he said.  “Bissonnette’s story differs from every from every single person I have spoken to, and every person the Pakistanis spoke to.”

In addition to speaking to members of SEAL Team 6, who were on the raid, Pfarrer, a retired SEAL officer, had accessed to the 150-page report produced by Pakistani security forces, he said. The White Paper by a very well-respected Pakistani Army general is the basis for much of the new information he included in the soon to be released edition of “SEAL Target Geronimo.”

Urban warfare doctrine calls for taking a building from the top down when possible, he said.

“Everyone I talk to, the assaulters, they all say the same thing,” he said. “Successful insertion on the roof, and bin Laden’s business was over in 90 to 120 seconds.”

Instead of fast roping, the Black Hawk landed the assaulters directly on the roof, he said. The assaulters then crashed through a two windows onto the Bin Laden’s compartments on the third floor.

“The helicopter remained on the roof for 10, 12, 18 minutes — it was on there,” he said. Then once the shooting was over, the helicopter was supposed to then move park in the compound yard, staged to pick people up and take them out.

It was moving from the roof to the staging position that the helicopter crashed, he said.

The only possible explanation for Bissonnette’s narrative is that out of respect for the Task Force 160 pilots and flight crew, Bissonnette concocted his version of the crash, putting the crash as part of the insertion, so as to deflect from the obvious pilot error that cost the mission one of its aircraft, he said.

“The Task Force 160 guys are the best,” he said. “Even in my own book, I tried to treat the crash as gently as possible.”

“Here’s the other outstanding thing in Bissonnette’s story, he’s trying to say it was 15 minutes before they got to the third floor,” he said.
“How is possible that Bin Laden would wait in his room 15 minutes for the attackers to come get him,” he said. “It can’t happen that way”
“Are we really supposed to think that his shots are the ones that got Bin Laden, and it was 15 minutes after his boots hit the ground that he finally made it to the third floor and engaged?” he said.

Pfarrer said he agrees with Bissonnette’s account that Bin Laden had a pistol and rifle in his room, but it is bizarre that after a helicopter crash, three explosive breeches and a firefight coming up the stairs, Bin Laden had not yet reached for his firearms.

“That’s where the whole thing falls apart,” he said.

“I have a hard time explaining any of this,” he said. “I’ve been on missions, and I don’t talk about where I was and when I engaged people, I don’t know, it’s unfathomable.  He is now making himself the biggest target in the world.”


----------



## Konan (Sep 11, 2012)

I guess no one will know the real truth until one of the other assaulters makes a comment.
And I'm sure someone will, if not sooner, then later.


----------



## Konan (Sep 11, 2012)

Did some of the entry team not have helmet-cams on?
Surely it should be easy to prove or disprove the author's statements?


----------



## TheSiatonist (Sep 11, 2012)

That's dknob's job -- to secure a copy of the helmet cam video of the raid.  LOL!


----------



## rockclimber (Sep 11, 2012)

What is it with online publications these days? Does no one proofread their work anymore? Reading that article made me cringe.

My comment from the peanut gallery: This seems to very quickly be digressing into mere speculation and "I talked to my friend who knows a guy whose brother's uncle is on the team, and he said..." type comments and insinuations.


----------



## dknob (Sep 11, 2012)

Chuck Pfarrer is such a douche omg hahah.

Inconsistencies? If anything the whole thing makes more sense after reading Mark tell the tale. 

Chuck's experiences are outdated and insignificant to the topic at hand.


----------



## Deadpool (Sep 11, 2012)

dknob said:


> Chuck Pfarrer is such a douche omg hahah.
> 
> Inconsistencies? If anything the whole thing makes more sense after reading Mark tell the tale.
> 
> Chuck's experiences are outdated and insignificant to the topic at hand.


 
No offense to Chuck at all, I respect him for what he's done - but I have to agree with you on this one.
Again, with all due respect to him, but didn't he try to claim he was training DevGru Operators for or before the Bin Laden Op went down? I'm sorry, but I'm just a little skeptical considering his...uh...how do I put this, considering the shape he's in.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 11, 2012)

Read the link "The Pakistani's say...."
That's all I needed to see to know Chuck is woofing crap.  He's pissed that his book/movie rights are getting squeezed and is trying to make himself relevant.


----------



## CDG (Sep 11, 2012)

How can you all doubt the man with the "Warrior Soul"?


----------



## goon175 (Sep 11, 2012)

shit, guys are just comin' out of the woodwork now!


----------



## dknob (Sep 11, 2012)

He never even mentions "stealth helicopter" in the entire book. Interesting.

There was a neat little factoid that I didn't know as well. He said that no East Coast SEAL Team was deployed into Afghanistan or Iraq until 2004. That's sad.


----------



## Ravage (Sep 11, 2012)

Laid-back surfers vs Carhartt-wearing rednecks


----------



## Centermass (Sep 11, 2012)

Yea, it's funny, isn't it?

Curious to know how many cheer leaders for the book could be counted on in the future when it comes to classified info, safeguarding national secrets or conducting ops? The whole thing makes me sick.

Nothing like getting PNG'd from the community or wondering each and every time you answer the door or start your car.

Hope it was worth it.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 11, 2012)

*Panetta hints punishment for bin Laden book author*

*http://news.yahoo.com/panetta-hints-punishment-bin-laden-book-author-120106393.html*


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 11, 2012)

I would be surprised if he backed up those words, especially right before the election.  The credibility of the current administration when it comes to security leaks... yeah... I can't see them going after a "bona fide hero" when the administration is under suspicion of doing the same, if not worse.  They SHOULD do it, but I don't think they have the guts.  Which means this guy will probably walk off into the sunset with his millions and his movie deal, and the next guy will see those dollar signs and start writing his own book.


----------



## RackMaster (Sep 11, 2012)

I'm gonna write a book about all my potato peeling and orange shit bag secrets.


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 11, 2012)

You fucking better not.


----------



## RackMaster (Sep 11, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> You fucking better not.



Are you already writing a book about shit?


----------



## SpitfireV (Sep 11, 2012)

RackMaster said:


> Are you already writing a book about shit?


 
All sorts of shit.


----------



## Deadpool (Sep 11, 2012)

SpitfireV said:


> All sorts of shit.


I'm writing a book on my short and embarrassing life with shit...my own shit.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 11, 2012)

dknob said:


> He never even mentions "stealth helicopter" in the entire book. Interesting.
> 
> There was a neat little factoid that I didn't know as well. He said that no East Coast SEAL Team was deployed into Afghanistan or Iraq until 2004. That's sad.


East Coast Teams were busy elsewhere.  how long it was before non-3rd/5th Group Teams entered the fray?


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 11, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I would be surprised if he backed up those words, especially right before the election. The credibility of the current administration when it comes to security leaks... yeah... I can't see them going after a "bona fide hero" when the administration is under suspicion of doing the same, if not worse. They SHOULD do it, but I don't think they have the guts. Which means this guy will probably walk off into the sunset with his millions and his movie deal, and the next guy will see those dollar signs and start writing his own book.


 
I agree, there will be another "Mark Owen" because the law will not be enforced in this case.  I think it will be the next guy who throws caution to the wind and publishes a book that will be looking at serious repercussions.


----------



## Konan (Sep 11, 2012)

Serious Repercussions. Great title! Thanks.


----------



## Konan (Sep 11, 2012)

Qoute: " _The secretary stopped short of accusing the author of revealing classified information, but said Pentagon officials "are currently reviewing that book to determine exactly, you know, what is classified and what isn't, and where those lines are."_
_Panetta said the book, which went on sale this week, raises troubling national security questions._
_"Well, I think when somebody talks about the particulars of how those operations are conducted, it tells our enemies, essentially, how we operate and what we do to go after them," he said."_ Unquote

Pentagon officials are still reviewing the book to check for whatever they think is and isn't classified?
The book's been out for days already and they're still revieiwng it?  I wonder if they're reading out loud, slowly, maybe using a dictionary to check the big words.

_How we operate_?
Hmmm....there's a ton of fiction and non-fiction novels already published that provide plenty of information on how bad guys are tracked, monitored and taken out or captured.
The secretary is just blowing hot air, plainly unaware of how much anti-terrorist info is already available in print and on the Net.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 11, 2012)

Konan said:


> Qoute: " _The secretary stopped short of accusing the author of revealing classified information, but said Pentagon officials "are currently reviewing that book to determine exactly, you know, what is classified and what isn't, and where those lines are."_
> _Panetta said the book, which went on sale this week, raises troubling national security questions._
> _"Well, I think when somebody talks about the particulars of how those operations are conducted, it tells our enemies, essentially, how we operate and what we do to go after them," he said."_ Unquote
> 
> ...


 
It takes time to do an investigation, especially for a large book, especially when the investigation is extremely high-profile and needs to be done right the first time.  Four days isn't a long time.

I am quite sure the Secretary is quite aware of all the stuff that is already out there.  And I hope he starts doing something about it, with this case.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 11, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> It takes time to do an investigation, especially for a large book, especially when the investigation is extremely high-profile and needs to be done right the first time. Four days isn't a long time.
> 
> I am quite sure the Secretary is quite aware of all the stuff that is already out there. And I hope he starts doing something about it, with this case.


 
They have had a copy before it came out.   They got it few days-to a week before it actually hit shelves.


----------



## goon175 (Sep 11, 2012)

I wonder if SECDEF will leave an Amazon review?


----------



## Konan (Sep 11, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I am quite sure the Secretary is quite aware of all the stuff that is already out there. And I hope he starts doing something about it, with this case.


 
You got more faith in the intellectual resources of the suits than me, amigo. I'm always surprised that the majority can tie their own shoelaces.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 12, 2012)

I am slowly working my way through the book.

While the DEVGRU acronym is all over the internet, I wish he hadn't used and had just stuck with ST6.

I learned that there were two parachute drops during the Somali Pirate Rescue mission and it appears (not specifically stated) that some SWCC folks were involved.

That may have been classified, but National Security wasn't harmed and won't be.  

Those are my only two beefs so far.


----------



## Konan (Sep 12, 2012)

Well, at least there's one some good news. ;)

No Easy Day has ousted 50 Shades of Grey from the #1 spot in the bestseller lists.
http://www.usatoday.com/life/books/news/story/2012-09-11/no-easy-day-fifty-shades-of-grey/57751958/1


----------



## LOOON (Sep 12, 2012)

If I had written a book one year after Operation Just Cause, detailing the missions that I was involved in, I would have spent the rest of my adult life behind bars.

Secret, Top secret, NDA's, and OPSEC don't mean shit anymore.

To this day, I still haven't told my family jack shit about what I did or didn't do. Why? Because I agreed not to and I was told not to.

Just because one group or one person already opened their yap about shit, does not mean "you" get a pass for doing the same later on down the road.

You want to serve in a unit that requires you to at least have a secret clearance? That means that EVERYTHING you do is to be considered "secret" in regard to training and actual operations.

I hope they make an example out of this guy and they put him away for the rest of his life. Nobody but his own sorry ass endangered him and his family.


----------



## dknob (Sep 12, 2012)

Life in prison?
Are you serious ?

I think any further comments on this topic should be reserved for anybody who read the book.

Fact of the matter is the book is completely innocent - I read it in less then two days and even went back to skim over the material. He talks about his life in the SEALs, his time in Green Team which doesn't disclose much of anything about the training other then climbing up a caving ladder when you fuck up. He never mentions troop strength, never refers to the squadrons by any color designation, doesn't even mention any stealth helicopters, doesn't even talk about the Chinook shoot down a couple of months after the raid. He keeps it simple and to the point - that the bin Laden raid was just like any typical raid throughout Afgh/Pakistan. He doesn't talk about the ISI, he doesn't talk about any Pakistani doctor working for the CIA, the only CIA mention he has is in incredible praise to a lady who was working the bin Laden case since 2007. The guy is very likeable, hes not arrogant or egotistical, and he's humble.

Yeah he broke his NDA, but leaking classified information? The government could nitpick the entire book and they wouldn't have a case against him. The DOD and the arm chair commandos behind the keyboards are now just trying to save face because the book turned out to be incredibly innocent. More-so then books like KBL, Wasdin's book, and Blaber's book, etc.

I have nothing else to add.. if you didn't read the book, (fine.. edited).


----------



## Desperado (Sep 12, 2012)

dknob said:


> I think any further comments on this topic should be reserved for anybody who read the book.


 
You might have a point regards the Opsec/PerSec issues (even then, though, I'm not sure); but one need not read the book to have a valid opinion on the NDA and COC angle (i.e. whether it should have been written in the first place, sans review, and with the excuse "my boss did it first").

A little off topic, but I'd like to ask a question. I had some very limited exposure to Military SOF and Civilian Intel personnel from various other countries. It did not seem to me they had these issues. They very well might have; as I said, my exposure was brief and limited. But I got the _general impression_ of a greater level of maturity which almost seemed cultural, if not individual (yes, there were some real dicks). Have any of you people seen this kind of issue with the SAS, MI6, 262, 269, G9, etc? If so, then I guess I'm off base. But if not, would that be because their individuals are less inclined for personal reasons (NDA enforcement, etc.) or cultural (i.e. their country doesn't have the fascination with violence and reverence for the military that we do and thus the books wouldn't sell or the stories would not get you laid)?  And, any anecdotal evidence of them being the same aside, what is your _general impression_ of the phenomena with them?


----------



## Centermass (Sep 12, 2012)

dknob? That STFU comment was over the top Brother. Reading the book has nothing to do with anything. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way he went about it and the way it was released. The only authority recognized to clear such material was the original classifying authority in the first place, not some lawyer or publisher. And as of this date, it still hasn't happened. And even if it had, the protocol has to be one of not putting the cart in front of the damn horse (Writing and releasing it first before it has gotten a green light to proceed)



Desperado said:


> You might have a point regards the Opsec/PerSec issues (even then, though, I'm not sure); but one need not read the book to have a valid opinion on the NDA and COC angle (i.e. whether it should have been written in the first place, sans review, and with the excuse "my boss did it first").


 
Bingo.



Desperado said:


> A little off topic, but I'd like to ask a question. I had some very limited exposure to Military SOF and Civilian Intel personnel from various other countries. It did not seem to me they had these issues. They very well might have; as I said, my exposure was brief and limited. But I got the _general impression_ of a greater level of maturity which almost seemed cultural, if not individual (yes, there were some real dicks). Have any of you people seen this kind of issue with the SAS, MI6, 262, 269, G9, etc? If so, then I guess I'm off base. But if not, would that be because their individuals are less inclined for personal reasons (NDA enforcement, etc.) or cultural (i.e. their country doesn't have the fascination with violence and reverence for the military that we do and thus the books wouldn't sell or the stories would not get you laid)? And, any anecdotal evidence of them being the same aside, what is your _general impression_ of the phenomena with them?


 
Well, let me ask you a very simple question playing from the outside as someone from another country watching and observing all these breaches. "How willing will I be next time I need to read anyone in on something very sensitive in nature that unilaterally affects us both?"


----------



## Konan (Sep 12, 2012)

Desperado said:


> A little off topic, but I'd like to ask a question. I had some very limited exposure to Military SOF and Civilian Intel personnel from various other countries. It did not seem to me they had these issues. They very well might have; as I said, my exposure was brief and limited. But I got the _general impression_ of a greater level of maturity which almost seemed cultural, if not individual (yes, there were some real dicks). Have any of you people seen this kind of issue with the SAS, MI6, 262, 269, G9, etc? If so, then I guess I'm off base. But if not, would that be because their individuals are less inclined for personal reasons (NDA enforcement, etc.) or cultural (i.e. their country doesn't have the fascination with violence and reverence for the military that we do and thus the books wouldn't sell or the stories would not get you laid)? And, any anecdotal evidence of them being the same aside, what is your _general impression_ of the phenomena with them?


 

I already mentioned that Andy McNab, ex-SAS, had to attend a DOD instigated court case to prove that he didn't break OPSEC with his two non-fiction novels: Bravo Two Zero and Immediate Action.
And there's been some real clangers dropped by ex British Secret Service and MI6 operatives over the years.
There's even two quite detailed non-fiction books about undercover operatives who worked in Northern Ireland during the height of the IRA actions.


----------



## dknob (Sep 12, 2012)

The SAS are full of so many prima donnas writing books.


----------



## dknob (Sep 12, 2012)

Centermass said:


> dknob? That STFU comment was over the top Brother. Reading the book has nothing to do with anything. It has EVERYTHING to do with the way he went about it and the way it was released. The only authority recognized to clear such material was the original classifying authority in the first place, not some lawyer or publisher. And as of this date, it still hasn't happened. And even if it had, the protocol has to be one of not putting the cart in front of the damn horse (Writing and releasing it first before it has gotten a green light to proceed)


 You are right. Edited.

I get heated sometimes. And condemning the SEAL to life in prison is over the top.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 12, 2012)

Thanks for the eye openers.  I guess my subjective perception of "maturity" was wrong.  

Since it's off topic, if the mood strikes me, I will conduct my own research as to how the various markets received those books.  My guess (which may be just as wrong as my subjective perception), is that the books had a relatively greater reception/sales in the U.S. market than they did in their home country.  Nevertheless, if anyone already knows off the top of their head, I'd like to hear about it (PM if we're too far astray here).


----------



## Konan (Sep 12, 2012)

dknob said:


> The SAS are full of so many prima donnas writing books.


 
It's amazing how many gifted authors have served in the SAS isn't it.


----------



## Konan (Sep 12, 2012)

Desperado said:


> Thanks for the eye openers. I guess my subjective perception of "maturity" was wrong.
> 
> Since it's off topic, if the mood strikes me, I will conduct my own research as to how the various markets received those books. My guess (which may be just as wrong as my subjective perception), is that the books had a relatively greater reception/sales in the U.S. market than they did in their home country. Nevertheless, if anyone already knows off the top of their head, I'd like to hear about it (PM if we're too far astray here).


 
Some of the books probably never made it to the US market.
Whilst the MOD, families and other unit members may sometimes get upset by what has, or hasn't been written in certain Brit military non-fiction books, the general attitude, even from other soldiers, is likely to be: "Who gives a shit."

The more important thing, in my humble opinion, is that the ex-British soldiers and undercover operatives, haven't had their real identities plastered all over the papers, TV and Internet by the Brit media.
Even when their real names are known.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 12, 2012)

dknob said:


> Life in prison?
> Are you serious ?
> 
> I think any further comments on this topic should be reserved for anybody who read the book.
> ...


 
You have no idea what kind of shit storm Matt set off.  Did you know that the media is currently scrambling behind the scenes to ID the hot shot female CIA agent that Matt references in his book.  It might take them some time, but they will identify her and it probably won't be more than a couple weeks before they do.  This is the kind of second and third order effects that publishing a book like this has.


----------



## alibi (Sep 12, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> You have no idea what kind of shit storm Matt set off. Did you know that the media is currently scrambling behind the scenes to ID the hot shot female CIA agent that Matt references in his book. It might take them some time, but they will identify her and it probably won't be more than a couple weeks before they do. This is the kind of second and third order effects that publishing a book like this has.


 
Wouldn't that ruin her cover and force her out of her career if they accomplish that?


----------



## Desperado (Sep 12, 2012)

alibi said:


> Wouldn't that ruin her cover and force her out of her career if they accomplish that?


 
That's possible. On the other hand, if there are any name-dropping Belt Way insiders who fancy themselves as connected, and who knew about her, or knew someone who knew someone who knew about her, and if they didn't like her, they would just say a bunch of shit about how "every one knew who she worked for" and "she wasn't really clandestine" and "look at me, I'm cool and I know shit." In that case, it's okay if she's outed; because cool people said it didn't matter.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 12, 2012)

LOOON said:


> If I had written a book one year after Operation Just Cause, detailing the missions that I was involved in, I would have spent the rest of my adult life behind bars.
> 
> Secret, Top secret, NDA's, and OPSEC don't mean shit anymore.
> 
> ...


 
I also have to disagree with this as it is simply factually wrong.  Everything you do while maintaining a Secret or Top Secret clearance is not classified.  Not everything is OPSEC and I think that the military could do a better job explaining what information is OPSEC and what isn't because a lot of people run around thinking that every bit of information somehow relates to OPSEC.  I'm not trying to excuse Matt, but NDA's also need to be refined.  This was my experience, when I left Ranger Battalion I had to sign an NDA and when I asked about it I was simply told that all the OPSEC stuff that I was always told not to talk about is still OPSEC and I still can't talk about it after I sign the NDA.  Roger that, but when it comes to specifics I can see how this can get confusing.  I was never given a copy of the NDA so I can't reference it to see what kind of information I'm not supposed to talk about.  Again, no excuses but the military side of the house can do some work in clarifying things.  Another example, I was never asked to sign an NDA when I left Special Forces.  Personally, I don't take this as a de facto permission to run my mouth about sensitive shit.  For me this isn't about what is on a piece of paper anyway, it's about not jeopardizing ongoing operations and active duty personnel, but others will see this situation as a green light to write the next "explosive tell-all."


----------



## goon175 (Sep 12, 2012)

Now that I am slightly wiser, I can see how misconstrued what the average Ranger thinks OPSEC is. I don't think the leadership who can actually tell the difference says anything to change their mind as too much OPSEC is always better than not enough.


----------



## surgicalcric (Sep 12, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> ...I was never asked to sign an NDA when I left Special Forces...


 
You should have signed one when you signed into/in-processed your BN at the Legion.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 12, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> Everything you do while maintaining a Secret or Top Secret clearance is not classified. Not everything is OPSEC and I think that the military could do a better job explaining what information is OPSEC and what isn't because a lot of people run around thinking that every bit of information somehow relates to OPSEC.


 
While I agree with you as a general principle, I think that is the reason for pre-clearance in the first place.  They don't want us deciding what is and what is not OpSec.  If things are working the way they should, we don't know what's okay because there is shit we don't NTK.  So, let *them* decide before we publish.  Even if their reasons are arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law, it is still their call, and we can litigate that call later, if we choose.  But it is not our place to try and decipher it.  We could write "The Hobbit" and it should get cleared first, just in case their is some innuendo that "they" think could be inferred by the bad guys.  In reality, they'd probably expedite it if you tell them its a kids book unrelated to your service or experience.  Nevertheless, it's their call.


----------



## Centermass (Sep 12, 2012)

Desperado said:


> On the other hand, if there are any name-dropping Belt Way insiders who fancy themselves as connected, and who knew about her, or knew someone who knew someone who knew about her, and if they didn't like her, they would just say a bunch of shit about how "every one knew who she worked for" and "she wasn't really clandestine" and "look at me, I'm cool and I know shit."


 
Not for nothing, but this has got to be the longest sentence ever posted.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 12, 2012)

surgicalcric said:


> You should have signed one when you signed into/in-processed your BN at the Legion.


 
The only NDA I signed in SF was regarding some specific training I participated in.


----------



## Centermass (Sep 12, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> The only NDA I signed in SF was regarding some specific training I participated in.


 
Then your security manager must have been the same one Bradley Manning had.....


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 12, 2012)

We had a security manager!?!? Ever pull Staff Duty and go around opening doors to see how many are unlocked? What a joke.


----------



## Centermass (Sep 12, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> We had a security manager!?!? Every pull Staff Duty and go around opening doors to see how many are unlocked? What a joke.


 
Different animal Brother. SM as in Personnel and Information (not physical) as designated by DSEC's, G-2's and S-2's.


----------



## Konan (Sep 13, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> You have no idea what kind of shit storm Matt set off. Did you know that the media is currently scrambling behind the scenes to ID the hot shot female CIA agent that Matt references in his book. It might take them some time, but they will identify her and it probably won't be more than a couple weeks before they do. This is the kind of second and third order effects that publishing a book like this has.


 
I was kind of hoping* she* was really a *he* and that M. Owen was in his way, protecting the agent.
If not, then I see that M. Owen has indeed opened his mouth  far too widely.
(Unless she is about to retire and she plans to write her own memoirs, which would surely be worth more than M. Owen's.)
If one can imagine it, it can happen.


----------



## LOOON (Sep 13, 2012)

JackMurphyRGR said:


> I also have to disagree with this as it is simply factually wrong. Everything you do while maintaining a Secret or Top Secret clearance is not classified. Not everything is OPSEC and I think that the military could do a better job explaining what information is OPSEC and what isn't because a lot of people run around thinking that every bit of information somehow relates to OPSEC.


Maybe today it is. All I can do is refer to my time in the 75th in the late 80's and early 90's. We were told we couldn't talk about anything to anyone NOT in the unit. PERIOD. Even when we deployed for training, the only people who were allowed to be told when and where, were spouses. And yes, we were threatened with UCMJ prosecution if we violated OPSEC. At the minimum, you were booted from the unit.

Im sure shit is different these days for sure, considering how much is out in the open today. I used to ride on black helo's, and had interaction with Delta when the two groups were only a myth/legend. And I wish it was still the case..........


----------



## goon175 (Sep 13, 2012)

Anyone who wants evidence of how much shit has changed, just look at the fact that most SOF units have an active, officially endorsed, FB page.


----------



## Centermass (Sep 13, 2012)

The irony here that comes to mind is one of our nation's largest worldwide op ever undertaken, not classified, but viewed by all the rest of the world who sat and watched in awe as he conducted it. And when it was over and everything was said and done, he kept his mouth shut. Didn't have to or told to, he just did. 

Never bragged about it, used it to pursue fame or fortune or sought out the spotlight for dollars, and very well could have become extremely rich, without worry of exposing anything classified. He chose another road. One less traveled, more humble and silent. He rarely appeared in the media and remained a steadfast, quiet professional.

Potential book writers could learn something from the example set by Neil Armstrong.

Wishful thinking, yeah. But in my own book of lessons learned in life, he's the golden standard.


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 13, 2012)

LOOON said:


> Maybe today it is. All I can do is refer to my time in the 75th in the late 80's and early 90's. We were told we couldn't talk about anything to anyone NOT in the unit. PERIOD. Even when we deployed for training, the only people who were allowed to be told when and where, were spouses. And yes, we were threatened with UCMJ prosecution if we violated OPSEC. At the minimum, you were booted from the unit.
> 
> Im sure shit is different these days for sure, considering how much is out in the open today. I used to ride on black helo's, and had interaction with Delta when the two groups were only a myth/legend. And I wish it was still the case..........


 
I completely respect your principled stance of this topic and wish that others would give this some thought.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 13, 2012)

Centermass said:


> Wishful thinking, yeah. But in my own book of lessons learned in life, he's the golden standard.


 
Off topic, kind of, but Major Meadows trained me once and at the time he seemed like that kind of man, and humble.  Did he ever write anything about all the things he did?  If so, I never saw it.


----------



## Centermass (Sep 13, 2012)

Desperado said:


> Off topic, kind of, but Major Meadows trained me once and at the time he seemed like that kind of man, and humble. Did he ever write anything about all the things he did? If so, I never saw it.


 
I had the privilege of both serving with his son and meeting his father. Both men were cut from the exact same piece of cloth, and, yes. They too were and are the epitome of Quiet Professionals.

Believe me, if Dick had ever written a book on his life, you would have known about it. He went before his time and deserved a better shot over one thing in life he could not control, and remained courageous until he went. All the missions he participated in, and the secrets he knew, remain with him to this day.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 13, 2012)

Centermass said:


> I had the privilege of both serving with his son and meeting his father. Both men were cut from the exact same piece of cloth, and, yes. They too were and are the epitome of Quiet Professionals.
> 
> Believe me, if Dick had ever written a book on his life, you would have known about it. He went before his time and deserved a better shot over one thing in life he could not control, and remained courageous until he went. All the missions he participated in, and the secrets he knew, remain with him to this day.


 
He struck me as the kind of man who listened a lot.  And did things.  He could talk but he chose his words carefully.


----------



## DasBoot (Sep 13, 2012)

Centermass said:


> I had the privilege of both serving with his son and meeting his father. Both men were cut from the exact same piece of cloth, and, yes. They too were and are the epitome of Quiet Professionals.
> 
> Believe me, if Dick had ever written a book on his life, you would have known about it. He went before his time and deserved a better shot over one thing in life he could not control, and remained courageous until he went. All the missions he participated in, and the secrets he knew, remain with him to this day.


A biography about Major Meadows was recently released.  Major Meadows is one of my personal heroes and has been since I read about his exploits in a "Tip of the Spear" magazine I found in my dad's office.
http://www.amazon.com/The-Quiet-Professional-American-Warriors/dp/0813133998


----------



## CDG (Sep 13, 2012)

Desperado said:


> Off topic, kind of, but Major Meadows trained me once and at the time he seemed like that kind of man, and humble. Did he ever write anything about all the things he did? If so, I never saw it.


 
There is a biography on him written by military historian Alan Hoe, who apparently served with MAJ Meadows in 1960.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Quiet-Professional-American-Warriors/dp/0813133998


----------



## DasBoot (Sep 13, 2012)

Maybe a little off topic, but in all the 60 Minute interviews and a lot of other press, it is being reported that Owen and all the other assaulters were awarded Silver Stars. They also add "with Valor"- which wouldn't make sense as all SS are awarded for valor- so I'm thinking maybe they meant BSM's w/Valor. Would that be a little extreme? I don't even think everyone on the Son Tay raid was decorated for Valor?

I'm in no way taking away from the actions of the guys on the ground, but everyone on here and even the author has said that this was like a 1000 other missions they've done over the last decade of war. So it just seems strange everyone would get the nation's 3rd highest award.


----------



## Desperado (Sep 13, 2012)

CDG said:


> There is a biography on him written by military historian Alan Hoe, who apparently served with MAJ Meadows in 1960.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/The-Quiet-Professional-American-Warriors/dp/0813133998


 
I'm not much on books like the one behind this thread, but I think I will pick up the books on Major Meadows.  I still have my hand-written scribbles from his training, trying to take notes while worn out and beat to shit.     He gave us a detailed run down on Son Tay (sp?).  A year or so later he was on the ground in Tehran.  I'd have given my left nut to have been there with him.  I think he carried his balls around in a wheel barrow.


----------



## Centermass (Sep 13, 2012)

Keep in mind, these books were written *about him* by men that knew him, and *not by him.*


----------



## DasBoot (Sep 13, 2012)

Centermass said:


> Keep in mind, these books were written *about him* by men that knew him, and *not by him.*


And I think that's what makes him such a great soldier. The fact other people want to tell his story, specifically his friends and coworkers, speaks volumes about him as a person.


----------



## dknob (Sep 13, 2012)

DasBoot said:


> Maybe a little off topic, but in all the 60 Minute interviews and a lot of other press, it is being reported that Owen and all the other assaulters were awarded Silver Stars. They also add "with Valor"- which wouldn't make sense as all SS are awarded for valor- so I'm thinking maybe they meant BSM's w/Valor. Would that be a little extreme? I don't even think everyone on the Son Tay raid was decorated for Valor?
> 
> I'm in no way taking away from the actions of the guys on the ground, but everyone on here and even the author has said that this was like a 1000 other missions they've done over the last decade of war. So it just seems strange everyone would get the nation's 3rd highest award.


 Nah not strange at all, and I do believe they probably gave the guys all Silver Stars.

We were all promised JCOMs for participating on the AMZ objectives but didn't get shit. Somebody must have forgot once the paperwork began. haha


----------



## DasBoot (Sep 13, 2012)

dknob said:


> Nah not strange at all, and I do believe they probably gave the guys all Silver Stars.
> 
> We were all promised JCOMs for participating on the AMZ objectives but didn't get shit. Somebody must have forgot once the paperwork began. haha


Ok that makes sense then. I was a retard last year and actually posted some stupid shit about giving all of them MOHs (I was pretty stupid back then, read my first posts ). Sucks about you guys not getting that recognition, but at least you all know what you did and can be proud of it


----------



## goon175 (Sep 13, 2012)

Just because the way the mission was conducted was like a 1000 others conducted that year, does not mean it carried the same amount of danger, consequences if failed, etc. It's one thing to go do a hit in afghanistan or iraq, quite another to fly under the radar into the heart of a hostile country and do a hit. If shit went wrong, they were a LOOONG way from friendlies. And that little qrf they had sitting out in the desert wasn't going to do shit if abotobad turned into the next mogadishu circa 1993. I don't have a problem with them all being decorated with valorous awards, it was a brave thing they did and any one of them could have turned it down. But thats what makes them and all SOF units special, they live and breathe for a shot at something like that. Doesn't make their actions any less valorous though. I will talk shit and poke fun at DEVGRU specifically and NSW in general all day long, but that doesn't mean I don't think what they have done is anything less than heroic.


----------



## DasBoot (Sep 13, 2012)

goon175 said:


> Just because the way the mission was conducted was like a 1000 others conducted that year, does not mean it carried the same amount of danger, consequences if failed, etc. It's one thing to go do a hit in afghanistan or iraq, quite another to fly under the radar into the heart of a hostile country and do a hit. If shit went wrong, they were a LOOONG way from friendlies. And that little qrf they had sitting out in the desert wasn't going to do shit if abotobad turned into the next mogadishu circa 1993. I don't have a problem with them all being decorated with valorous awards, it was a brave thing they did and any one of them could have turned it down. But thats what makes them and all SOF units special, they live and breathe for a shot at something like that. Doesn't make their actions any less valorous though. I will talk shit and poke fun at DEVGRU specifically and NSW in general all day long, but that doesn't mean I don't think what they have done is anything less than heroic.


Very well put. I'm an outsider and wanted a little perspective on the matter. It would never be my place to question the courage and valor of men who are out there kicking ass right now.


----------



## Loki (Sep 13, 2012)

*Panetta Hints Punishment for Bin Laden Book Author*

I apologize if this is re-post but if not read this; 
http://www.military.com/daily-news/...ent-for-bin-laden-book-author.html?ESRC=eb.nl


----------



## JackMurphyRGR (Sep 13, 2012)

Dick Meadows was going to do a book with John Plaster but sadly, Dick passed away before that could happen.  Damn shame.


----------



## Ravage (Sep 14, 2012)

Just dug this up.......I had to


----------



## Deadpool (Sep 14, 2012)

Ravage said:


> Just dug this up.......I had to


 
Let's play a game, how high were the people who conjured up this idea on a scale of 1 to Carl Sagan?


----------



## Konan (Sep 15, 2012)

They hired locals to play the part of the zombies.
"These guys are just naturals," the director was heard to comment.


----------



## KBar666 (Sep 15, 2012)

The ultimate in cheesey


----------



## Konan (Sep 19, 2012)

Mark Owens is on a roll.

http://www.shacknews.com/article/75843/no-easy-day-author-consulted-for-medal-of-honor-warfighter

Quote from the article: _ "This guy, very simply, sought to profit from his experiences as an operator."_Unquote.

Yeah. Strange that. Guy's got a skill set that he can take with him into civilian life and make work for him and some people think that's not okay?
Get a clue.
Plenty of ex-military guys now serving in private 'security' companies around the world. Plenty more writing books and advising on action video games and movies.

I note that the Government has still not taken any action against No Easy Day.
All bluster and no bullets.
They talk a good fight, but like everything else they do of late, are mere toothless tigers slobbering to the media in righteous indignation, but failing to back up any of their threats.
Likely Mark Owen will still be writing books when Obama and the current powers are long gone and forgotten.


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 19, 2012)

> Yeah. Strange that. Guy's got a skill set that he can take with him into civilian life and make work for him and some people think that's not okay?


 
No, it's not OK.  He gave his word (through a binding signature) that it's not OK.  The culture of the community says it's not OK.  And the law says it's not OK.

So yeah, it's not OK.


----------



## CDG (Sep 19, 2012)

Konan said:


> Yeah. Strange that. Guy's got a skill set that he can take with him into civilian life and make work for him and some people think that's not okay?
> Get a clue.


 
The guy could have used his skillset to make money on the civilian side without violating NDAs and betraying his teammates.  Speaking of needing to get a clue....


----------



## AWP (Sep 19, 2012)

I wish I'd done something cool so I could cash in my NDAs for fame and fortune.


----------



## Loki (Sep 19, 2012)

Freefalling said:


> I wish I'd done something cool so I could cash in my NDAs for fame and fortune.


Story of my life... I wonder if I could publish a book; "I was that close, mission scrubbed"? It would be like "the one that got away".


----------



## Konan (Sep 19, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> No, it's not OK. He gave his word (through a binding signature) that it's not OK. The culture of the community says it's not OK. And the law says it's not OK.
> 
> So yeah, it's not OK.


 
That binding signature doesn't seem to be binding at all, does it?
The law says it's not okay...law doesn't seem to have done anything either.
Culture of the community...have any of the SEAL's that Mark Owen served with actually come right out and said they're pissed with him?
Or is it all from the higher echelons of the service and Government?

The culture amongst younger service members is changing I think.
In the UK Special Forces operators think nothing of leaving the service after a tour and going private.
In fact it was recently announced that the British SAS is manpower short due to the high number of members who have left to join private 'security' companies.
(I understand that it's not private military contractor anymore, now it's private security/protection contractor. Trying to get away from the mercenary tag.)
The fighting for your country, or fighting for a paypacket ideal is beginning to blur.
Lot of guys and gals are thinking why shouldn't they get paid more for the work they do.
It begs the question: Should a (for example) Navy SEAL in a combat zone get paid more than an Admiral in a safe zone?

But back to the Mark Owen book debate....I'm wondering what the resultant fervor would have been if he had written a fictional novel about SEALS and included details of the Bin Liner kiling as part of the fictional plot?


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Sep 20, 2012)

While actions might speak louder than words, lack of action doesn't mean he hasn't broken the law/pissed off Team Guys he served with.  

Geez, what was that, like a triple negative?  :ehh:


----------



## Ravage (Sep 20, 2012)

Interesting:

http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/sons-of-guns/videos/the-gun-that-killed-osama.htm#mkcpgn=fbdsc30


----------



## fox1371 (Sep 20, 2012)

Ravage said:


> Interesting:
> 
> http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-shows/sons-of-guns/videos/the-gun-that-killed-osama.htm#mkcpgn=fbdsc30


Not quite sure how this applies...

It's a video of Chris Kyle from Craft International doing some shooting with the guys from Red Jacket.


----------



## Centermass (Sep 20, 2012)

fox1371 said:


> Not quite sure how this applies...
> 
> It's a video of Chris Kyle from Craft International doing some shooting with the guys from Red Jacket.


 
Wanted a "Recreation" of the HK "Believed" to have been used to take out OBL.


----------



## CDG (Sep 20, 2012)

Konan said:


> Culture of the community...have any of the SEAL's that Mark Owen served with actually come right out and said they're pissed with him?


 
Written by another SEAL that served with Mark Owen: http://www.theblaze.com/contributio...n-laden-raid-book-we-weep-from-your-betrayal/

"Every SEAL I’ve spoken with feels betrayed by his actions. He’s loved by his brothers, but forbidden to ever stand within their circle again."


----------



## Konan (Sep 20, 2012)

CDG said:


> Written by another SEAL that served with Mark Owen: http://www.theblaze.com/contributio...n-laden-raid-book-we-weep-from-your-betrayal/
> 
> "Every SEAL I’ve spoken with feels betrayed by his actions. He’s loved by his brothers, but forbidden to ever stand within their circle again."


 
You sure Emily Bronte didn't write that story?

_"It took me all of two text messages to figure out who wrote the book, and *in an instant my heart was broken.* I’m still conflicted. I‘m mad but I don’t want to be. Part of me understands why Mark did what he did, but there’s *another part of me is so disappointed it makes me physically ill.* Every SEAL I’ve spoken with feels betrayed by his actions. *He’s loved by his brothers, but forbidden to ever stand within their circle again.*"_

Pass me a tissue.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 20, 2012)

CDG said:


> Written by another SEAL that served with Mark Owen: http://www.theblaze.com/contributio...n-laden-raid-book-we-weep-from-your-betrayal/
> 
> "Every SEAL I’ve spoken with feels betrayed by his actions. He’s loved by his brothers, but forbidden to ever stand within their circle again."


He'll still get to go to the reunion in FL every year.


----------



## dknob (Sep 20, 2012)

As former commander of JSOC, why would McChrystal not be criticized for writing a book? I'm sure it has some material of his Hunter Killer time with 145 in Iraq..


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 20, 2012)

Konan said:


> ...Pass me a tissue...


You got that choked up? Kindler, gentler type I see.


----------



## policemedic (Sep 20, 2012)

Konan said:


> That binding signature doesn't seem to be binding at all, does it?
> The law says it's not okay...law doesn't seem to have done anything either.
> Are you really implying that if a law isn't immediately enforced, it's acceptable to violate it?
> 
> ...


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 20, 2012)

dknob said:


> As former commander of JSOC, why would McChrystal not be criticized for writing a book? I'm sure it has some material of his Hunter Killer time with 145 in Iraq..


 
I fully expect he will be criticized for the book, and there may be some justification for it.  I guess we'll have to see what happens when the book is released.

But I fail to see what that has to do with this thread.


----------



## policemedic (Sep 20, 2012)

Marauder06 said:


> I fully expect he will be criticized for the book, and there may be some justification for it. I guess we'll have to see what happens when the book is released.
> 
> But I fail to see what that has to do with this thread.


 
The most striking difference between McChrystal's work and Owen's book is that McChrystal submitted his manuscript for proper vetting.  He may be criticized, but not for the same reasons.  That's one book I'll read.


----------



## dknob (Sep 20, 2012)

Im stirring the pot lol


----------



## Loki (Sep 20, 2012)

Yea this film shouldn't piss off any Islamists.. Brought to you by the same Liberal POS that made the worst film ever on the conflict. I think the "information" released in this and the controversy this will bring will hold the DOD from prosecuting the author of this book. In fact I assert they don't want to "GO THERE" because of the back lash it could cause.


----------



## Konan (Sep 21, 2012)

amlove21 said:


> You got that choked up? Kindler, gentler type I see.


 
Yeah. That's me. Sensitive.
As a Wolverine.


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 21, 2012)

Konan said:


> Yeah. That's me. Sensitive.
> As a Wolverine.


 Wolverines are not the most sensitive creatures. Have you ever read anything about wolverines? They are quite vicious. I am beginning to think you don't mean what you type. Wait! I get it. You mean you ARENT sensitive.

So you are saying that, instead of actually being brought to tears by that SEAL's sentiments (hence your need to pass a tissue), you were being sarcastic and poking fun at his choice of words.

That would beg me to ask- when you were on the SEAL teams, what was an acceptable reaction to the blatant breach of a NDA and the resultant treatment of that individual in the Team rooms, and in the community? Furthermore, how would you prefer the SEALs express that to people that don't understand the community?


----------



## Shutefight (Sep 21, 2012)

policemedic said:


> It doesn't seem any officials vetted the material, and that's a problem.
> 
> Bottom line in my view- disclose classified information and you need to go to federal prison.
> 
> ...


 


An acquaintance of mine, ( he is a "Girl Scout" by his own definition) has had several occasions over more than a decade, to personally interact with said "author". Until the release of this book, he had very high opinion of said "author", now....not so much. I am on page 70 right now. I am by no means any expert in OPSEC, but from my limited knowledge, it does not appear that he has given readers much actionable intel. Again, coming from me, that might not mean shit. While I fully understand that this clearly flies in the face of a long standing SOC ethos of, " the less said the better", is there any redeeming value in 1/2 the profits being invested in helping wounded warriors and their families? As an uninformed civilian, I am torn by this situation. I absolutely love, eat and breath this type of info and am so glad to have books out like Lone Survivor, SEAL of Honor, Victory Point, Service, etc etc.  Conversely, I don't want to contribute financially to something that may in fact compromise the safety and security of any operators or more importantly, their families.


----------



## Centermass (Sep 21, 2012)

Shutefight said:


> *I am torn by this situation.* I absolutely love, eat and breath this type of info and am so glad to have books out like Lone Survivor, SEAL of Honor, Victory Point, Service, etc etc. Conversely, *I don't want to contribute financially to something that may in fact compromise the safety and security of any operators or more importantly, their families.*


 
So, you're torn by this?



Shutefight said:


> I am on page 70 right now.


 
Doesn't appear so.


----------



## Shutefight (Sep 21, 2012)

Centermass said:


> So, you're torn by this?
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't appear so.


Trust me, I labored over this purchase. Please understand that as an outsider, I cannot see this issue with the same level of detail as those in the know. There is a part of me that would like to see you guys getting financially rewarded for your service in a more generous fashion. It sickens me to watch all these pop culture Peacocks raking it in for acting like felons and assholes, while those who stand in the face of real threats, are forced into situations of financial duress and worry about supporting their/your families. I asked my "acquaintance" if I should NOT buy this book, so as not to support an unacceptable situation? I can only act under the assumption that this author is an honorable man and would not jeopardize his brothers. My acquaintance feels that is a fair assumption. My understanding is that the money is going to help our Military. As a devoted member of the Patriot Guard Riders, I invest as much as I can to that end. Trust me, if the overwhelming opinion among the members of this board is that I've contributed $ to a potential breach, I will be nothing short of sick to my stomach. I am still interested in knowing the opinions of those here regarding this issue.


----------



## dknob (Sep 21, 2012)

i never thought of not buying it..
lol

I guess my morals suck?


----------



## Shutefight (Sep 21, 2012)

I didn't either, until my buddy told me he was pissed at him for writing it, as were other war fighters.


----------



## Chopstick (Sep 21, 2012)

Why not give directly to Wounded Warrior Project, Semper Fi Fund or the like directly without buying a book?


----------



## Shutefight (Sep 21, 2012)

Chopstick said:


> Why not give directly to Wounded Warrior Project, Semper Fi Fund or the like directly without buying a book?



I do, and have,  for many years....


----------



## Brian1/75 (Sep 21, 2012)

dknob said:


> i never thought of not buying it..
> lol
> 
> I guess my morals suck?


Yeah no shit, I guess I suck. I went to the bookstore, flipped through it and was like, "Hum there's enough classified/sensitive/shit I don't know in here that I'm going to buy it."


----------



## SkrewzLoose (Sep 22, 2012)

dknob said:


> i never thought of not buying it..
> lol
> 
> I guess my morals suck?


Pot stirrer.


----------



## Konan (Sep 22, 2012)

amlove21 said:


> Wolverines are not the most sensitive creatures. Have you ever read anything about wolverines? They are quite vicious. I am beginning to think you don't mean what you type. Wait! I get it. You mean you ARENT sensitive.
> 
> So you are saying that, instead of actually being brought to tears by that SEAL's sentiments (hence your need to pass a tissue), you were being sarcastic and poking fun at his choice of words.


 
Now you've got it.


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 22, 2012)

Konan said:


> Now you've got it.


Phew, for a minute there my brain really started to hurt. Thinking is HARD. 

Did you assume the second half of that post was rhetorical, or are you willfully ignoring the questions? I'll re-write them. 

When you were on the SEAL teams, what was an acceptable reaction to the blatant breach of a NDA and the resultant treatment of that individual in the Team rooms, and in the community? Furthermore, how would you prefer the SEALs express that to people that don't understand the community?


----------



## Konan (Sep 22, 2012)

amlove21 said:


> Phew, for a minute there my brain really started to hurt. Thinking is HARD.
> 
> Did you assume the second half of that post was rhetorical, or are you willfully ignoring the questions? I'll re-write them.
> 
> When you were on the SEAL teams, what was an acceptable reaction to the blatant breach of a NDA and the resultant treatment of that individual in the Team rooms, and in the community? Furthermore, how would you prefer the SEALs express that to people that don't understand the community?


 
When have I stated I served with a SEAL Team?

My post wasn't a reflection on what NDA's may or may not have been breached, it was an observation that the over the top sentiment expressed in the article was more akin to the kind of thing one might read in a Mills and Boon novel.

Perhaps Mr Owen may have some competition, SEAL Team romance stories could be the next big hit.


----------



## amlove21 (Sep 22, 2012)

Konan said:


> Yea, I was pretty far out of my lane, since I had nothing real to contribute with my original (and subsequent) posts. My original post was nothing more than a pithy, armchair quarterback, after the fact snipe, and this conversation would actually be better had I not said it. At least, it would be no different if it was gone.
> 
> Furthermore, I'll be a little more careful before talking shit openly about a grown man that I have never met, because I read the stickies and rules/FAQ to this site. Because that's how grown men in the SOF community treat each other. My bad, won't happen again.


 There. I fixed it for you.


----------



## AWP (Sep 22, 2012)

About the only reason I haven't killed this thread is that it has taken on a life of its own. The last few pages show an old and decrepit life.

The next couple of responses will determine if I euthanize or not.


----------



## Konan (Sep 22, 2012)

If someone's going to publish articles/stories/posts on the internet, then others can be expected to comment on them.

I've got a mind of my own, opinions of my own and I'll post up what I want.
If some people don't like it, then that's just too  bad.
It's called freedom of speech, something which I believe is a heated  subject right now, depending on what country you live in.


----------



## AWP (Sep 22, 2012)

Rest in Peace, Bin Laden Book thread.


----------



## Crusader74 (Sep 22, 2012)

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo


----------



## Crusader74 (Sep 22, 2012)

Konan said:


> If someone's going to publish articles/stories/posts on the internet, then others can be expected to comment on them.
> 
> I've got a mind of my own, opinions of my own and I'll post up what I want.
> If some people don't like it, then that's just too bad.
> It's called freedom of speech, something which I believe is a heated subject right now, depending on what country you live in.


 

Actually you can't post what the hell you want... If you read the rules of the site and you are a new member so they should be still fresh in your mind...

If whatever the hell you want breaches our rules then it will be deleted and you might be along with it..FYI.


----------



## Polar Bear (Sep 22, 2012)

Konan said:


> If someone's going to publish articles/stories/posts on the internet, then others can be expected to comment on them.
> 
> I've got a mind of my own, opinions of my own and I'll post up what I want.
> If some people don't like it, then that's just too  bad.
> It's called freedom of speech, something which I believe is a heated  subject right now, depending on what country you live in.



Way to go sparky. I just bought it tonight, and you made it on my radar. Batting .1000 for the TARD's


----------



## goon175 (Sep 24, 2012)

I know the other thread was closed, so mods feel free to lock this one as well, but I figured this would be something pertinent to the discussion.


----------



## RackMaster (Sep 24, 2012)

Thanks goon175.  Merged your thread into this one, I think DoD has the final say. ;)


----------



## Polar Bear (Sep 24, 2012)

Just finished it. For some reason 2 songs came to mind. Rocket Man by Elton John and Dog Days are Over by Florence and the Machine. Most will not like this but I understand why he wrote it and do not fault him.


----------



## CDG (Oct 31, 2014)

Matt Bissonette is making headlines again.  Apparently he is now under investigation for things he's said during public speaking events in addition to the material within the book.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/31/u...igated-for-bin-laden-book.html?ref=world&_r=0


----------

