Exploitation of Osama Anniversary Blows Up in Obama’s Face

[Sam Fisher]

Obama’s shameless attempts to exploit happening to have been in office when Osama bin Laden was killed a year ago have disgusted pretty much everyone — starting with those actually responsible, the SEALS.

Mr Obama used a news conference [yesterday] to trumpet his personal role and imply that his Republican opponent Mr Romney, who in 2008 expressed reservations about the wisdom of sending troops into Pakistan, would have let bin Laden live.

However,

Ryan Zinke, a former Commander in the US Navy who spent 23 years as a SEAL and led a SEAL Team 6 assault unit, said: ‘The decision was a no brainer.’

As a serving SEAL member observes,

‘…the more [Obama] tries to take the credit for it, the more the ground operators are saying, “Come on, man!” It really didn’t matter who was president. At the end of the day, they were going to go.’

Former SEAL sniper Chris Kyle remarks,

‘But bin Laden was just a figurehead. The war on terror continues. Taking him out didn’t really change anything as far as the war on terror is concerned and using it as a political attack is a cheap shot.’

The War on Terror isn’t over? That will come as news to the Obama Regime — until the next terror attack.

Kyle continues:

‘In years to come there is going to be information that will come out that Obama was not the man who made the call. He can say he did and the people who really know what happened are inside the Pentagon, are in the military and the military isn’t allowed to speak out against the commander-in-chief so his secret is safe.’

The decision actually rested on the shoulders of Admiral William McRaven, a former SEAL who had been set up to take the fall if anything went wrong. Obama’s alleged gutsy call was anything but:

A former intelligence official who was serving in the US government when bin Laden was killed said that the Obama administration knew about the al-Qaeda leader’s whereabouts in October 2010 but delayed taking action and risked letting him escape.

Yet the metrosexual community organizer now attempts to portray himself as a bold wartime commander.

Even Arianna Huffington of the leftist Huffington Post gasps that turning bin Laden’s demise “into a campaign ad is one of the most despicable things you can do.”

As for the absurd claim that Romney would not have given the order to take out Osama, Mitt replies,

‘Even Jimmy Carter would have given that order.’

Once again the Campaigner in Chief is letting his desperation show. His reelection prospects are not as rosy as the media would have us believe.

 

[PlasmaTwa2]

Why do you love Bin Laden, Sam?

 

[Trident1]

Yeah the SEALs are pretty pissed. After all they were the ones in harms way not the Prez.

 

[Mayhem]

Without challenging what has been stated, I'm calling bullshit on this one. Obama succeeded where the last guy failed, failed miserably, and as far as I'm concerned, failed on purpose. I expect him to politicize this, I want him to and I would be disappointed if he wasn't. And Arianna can just go have a hot, steaming cup of get-the-fuck-over-it!

 

[Johan]

Why do you love Bin Laden, Sam?

He loves Osama much more than he loves Barrack...

 

[xfire]

Another article Samantha plays off as her own words. What esteemed right-wing tampon did you scrape this off of? WND? Brietbart? Drudge?

Quote bubble, stupid, and source your fucking link.

 

[Trident1]

and as far as I'm concerned, failed on purpose.

So Bush allowed Binny to get away at Tora Bora in 2002? To say that Bush failed on purpose is to say Clinton didn't nab Binny on purpose when the Sudanese offered him.

 

[Mayhem]

I have nothing to say about Clinton and am not or ever have been a Clinton defender. Bush failed to nab bin Laden after the WTC and Pentagon were attacked. And I do think he failed on purpose because somehow a protracted war in Afganistan made perfect sense in his tiny, little pea-brain.

 

[xfire]

So Bush allowed Binny to get away at Tora Bora in 2002? To say that Bush failed on purpose is to say Clinton didn't nab Binny on purpose when the Sudanese offered him.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_didn't_clinton_take_bin_laden_when_sudan_offered_him_to_america

The answer to this is simple: Sudan never offered Bin Laden to the United States. They allegedly offered Bin Laden to Saudi Arabia. From the Washington Post (October 3, 2001):
"The government of Sudan, employing a back channel direct from its president to the Central Intelligence Agency, offered in the early spring of 1996 to arrest Osama bin Laden and place him in Saudi custody, according to officials and former officials in all three countries. .
The Clinton administration struggled to find a way to accept the offer in secret contacts that stretched from a meeting at a Rosslyn hotel on March 3, 1996, to a fax that closed the door on the effort 10 weeks later. Unable to persuade the Saudis to accept bin Laden, and lacking a case to indict him in U.S. courts at the time, the Clinton administration finally gave up on the capture.

Are you a liar or lazy?

 

[Mayhem]

Boom. BOOM! BOOOYAH!!! I post it and then go read about it.

Kerry Campaign Veterans Dismiss Complaints Over Obama's Bin Laden Ad (underlined and italicized to illustrate how good I am at making a point :thefinger: )

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/01/kerry-obama-osama-bin-laden-vets_n_1468551.html?ref=topbar

For veterans of John Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign, the past week of debate over the fairness of making political attacks out of national security issues has brought about a bit of nostalgia and, in many cases, the chance to sit back and smirk.

The Massachusetts senator was famously submarined by attacks over his own personal service and his capacity to handle modern terrorist threats. At the time, aides to Kerry cried foul, arguing that former President George W. Bush's re-election campaign and allied groups were playing on people's fears for electoral gains. With the shoe now firmly on the other foot -- and Republicans griping over an Obama campaign web ad suggesting that Mitt Romney wouldn't have approved the raid that killed Osama bin Laden -- the collective response from the Kerry crowd is something akin to: "tough shit."

"That was then, this is now," said Steve Elmendorf, Kerry's 2004 deputy campaign manager. "This is what people do with challengers. One of the advantages of incumbency is you get to do the job and make the tough decisions and you get to make suggestions about whether the challenger is up to the job."

There is a lengthy history of presidential campaigns using the threat of terrorism, war or even nuclear annihilation to raise questions about their opponent. The most infamous remains the Daisy Ad, run just once by President Lyndon Johnson against Republican Barry Goldwater in 1964, but forever memorialized as the dawn of airwave campaigns.

Bush's re-election team brought the practice to a heightened level. The president's advisers produced the infamous Wolves ad, warning voters about the nebulous threats on the horizon. His campaign attacked Kerry as un-appreciative of the troops and unwilling to make tough wartime decisions. Allied groups openly wondered if Kerry could have shown the leadership needed to respond to 9/11. The genre turned into outright character assassination when the group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth began raising doubts about the senator's record from Vietnam.

It is that latter attack that serves as a line of demarcation for the Obama campaign, which has argued that it's not engaging in the same tactics that Democrats once decried.

"The difference here is that we won't be swift boating Mitt Romney," Stephanie Cutter, Obama's campaign manager said in an email. "We are sticking to actual facts, not dishonest attacks and distortions. Romney said he wouldn't go into Pakistan to get Bin Laden, and then hit one of his opponents Mike Huckabee when he said that he would. That's important information to voters, because it shows a lack of judgment and a lack of strength, particularly if Romney is now saying that he would have given the same order the President did to get Bin Laden. He had a chance to get it right, without the enormous pressure of being the Commander in Chief, and he got it wrong."

Romney, on Tuesday, stressed that his opposition had never been to going after bin Laden in Pakistan but with announcing that policy publicly. "We always reserve the right to go anywhere to get bin Laden," he said, echoing the clarification he had offered back in 2007 when he first said he wouldn't move "heaven and earth" to find the al Qaeda chief.

As communications director for Kerry's '04 campaign, Cutter was a direct witness to the damage done when questions about a candidate's commander-in-chief bonafides go unanswered. The episode was scarring. And for her and other veterans of that election, as well as the Democratic Party at large, the result was an implicit pledge to never get out-macho-ed again. In 2008, that meant pledging renewed attention and resources to tracking al Qaeda as well as campaigning on a beefed-up military presence in Afghanistan. Four years later, it means contrasting successes against the opponent's blank foreign policy slate.

"This year's discussion," said David Wade, a member of the Kerry campaign press shop and now the senator's chief of staff, "is firmly rooted in Romney's record and his own words on an issue that's fundamental to being Commander in Chief. This is a debate about judgment not a false attack on the most personal and fundamental elements of a nominee's character ... No one should mistake 2004's low road for the substantive questions being asked of Mitt Romney eight years later."

Kerry himself was out of the country and unable to comment for this article.

The complaints with Obama's web ad, however, are not strictly that he's over-bragging about the political braveness in ordering the raid but, as former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) noted at an event with Romney, that he's using it "as a source of negative campaigning."

Those concerns, of course, didn't surface eight years ago when the roles were reversed. Wade, for one, noted that Vice President Dick Cheney suggested a Kerry win would result in a terrorist attack, while former Georgia governor and Sen. Zell Miller (D) said the troops would have only spitballs to use as defense with Kerry as Commander in Chief.

"Romney didn't say a peep," Wade added.

But Democrats certainly did, calling Cheney and Miller's comment beneath acceptable political rhetoric. For some Kerry veterans, it's impossible to deny the irony in the fault lines developing around the current web ad uproar. They just don't care. It's nice, after all, to be the aggressor.

"The hypocrisy goes both ways," acknowledged Matthew Butler, a deputy campaign manager for Kerry and now a top official at Media Matters. "They will politicize the hell out of foreign policy and then complain when we do it. And we will complain about them doing it and then do it ourselves. But I don't think foreign policy should be out of bounds when it comes to electing a president. How can you not question the fitness of a candidate to lead the country in foreign policy crisis?

"Obama would have been killed if something had gone wrong with that mission," he said. "The fact is it is perfectly fair game to tout its success."

 

[StanScratch]

Another article Samantha plays off as her own words. What esteemed right-wing tampon did you scrape this off of? WND? Brietbart? Drudge?

Quote bubble, stupid, and source your fucking link.

It is using it's favorite source, Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/?p=11204 (even has the same pictures at the bottom).
I am sure it just forgot. Again.
What pissed me off most about this thing is when Obama showed up on the flight of the aircraft carrier wearing a flight suit, a big banner saying "Mission Accomplished" behind him. Fucker.

 

[Trident1]

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_didn't_clinton_take_bin_laden_when_sudan_offered_him_to_america



Are you a liar or lazy?

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/clinton-passed-on-killing-bin-laden/


Slick Willy had a chance either through Sudan or Saudi Arabia.

 

[xfire]

Did you even read your own link?

Q: Did Bill Clinton pass up a chance to kill Osama bin Laden?

A: Probably not, and it would not have mattered anyway as there was no evidence at the time that bin Laden had committed any crimes against American citizens.

Are you a liar or illiterate?

 

[Trident1]

Did you even read your own link?



Are you a liar or illiterate?

Calm down you'll burst an artery.


Clinton: So we tried to be quite aggressive with them [al Qaeda]. We got – well, Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we’d been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, ’cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn’t and that’s how he wound up in Afghanistan.



Slicky could've done something but didn't. A terrorist who desired to murder Americans is simply left to their own devices. Such a pity. I realize Slicky didn't have a crystal ball to see the events in Kenya/Tanzania which occurred less than 2 years later which were done by Binny but he could've done something more than simply asking the Saudis to take him.


Barry has pissed off the SEAL community by politicizing their efforts, and an official from his admin. has claimed the war on terrorism is over. All mistakes.

 

[xfire]

Slicky could've done something but didn't. A terrorist who desired to murder Americans is simply left to their own devices. Such a pity. I realize Slicky didn't have a crystal ball to see the events in Kenya/Tanzania which occurred less than 2 years later which were done by Binny but he could've done something more than simply asking the Saudis to take him.

Again, are you lair or illiterate? Hey, sometime in the next 24 hours a crime will be committed. Why do you refuse to do something about it?

 

[Straight Shooter]

So Bush allowed Binny to get away at Tora Bora in 2002? To say that Bush failed on purpose is to say Clinton didn't nab Binny on purpose when the Sudanese offered him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm***TybQ9k

 

[Mayhem]

Calm down you'll burst an artery.


Clinton: So we tried to be quite aggressive with them [al Qaeda]. We got – well, Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we’d been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start dealing with them again. They released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, ’cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn’t and that’s how he wound up in Afghanistan.



Slicky could've done something but didn't. A terrorist who desired to murder Americans is simply left to their own devices. Such a pity. I realize Slicky didn't have a crystal ball to see the events in Kenya/Tanzania which occurred less than 2 years later which were done by Binny but he could've done something more than simply asking the Saudis to take him.


Barry has pissed off the SEAL community by politicizing their efforts, and an official from his admin. has claimed the war on terrorism is over. All mistakes.

Dude, if I sound hostile, I'm not trying to but that's some bullshit right there and you should know better. You said right there in your post that Osama hadn't committed any crimes yet. Next time you're at one of your Flag-Wavers Inc. meetings, bring up arresting people who have done nothing. Trust me, you'll get a response. We are not the country that arrests you for suspicion of intent to commit a crime, and you know it.

 

[PirateKing]

Fucking hypocrite. If Bush did this you would be commemorating his "exploitation". I hate to play the hypocrite card again, but it's simply true. Don't even deny it.

 

[Trident1]

Dude, if I sound hostile, I'm not trying to but that's some bullshit right there and you should know better. You said right there in your post that Osama hadn't committed any crimes yet. Next time you're at one of your Flag-Wavers Inc. meetings, bring up arresting people who have done nothing. Trust me, you'll get a response. We are not the country that arrests you for suspicion of intent to commit a crime, and you know it.

Again, are you lair or illiterate? Hey, sometime in the next 24 hours a crime will be committed. Why do you refuse to do something about it?

When you know the crime is about to be committed by a known individual it would be intelligent to have that person monitored. Keeping tabs on a known terrorist who has already made it known that Americans must die is paramount. OBL was behind the Khobar Towers hit in '96. That same year OBL publicly announced his declaration of war on the U.S.
Clinton/Madaleine Albright could've done more but didn't.

Fucking hypocrite.

Are you name calling? Aren't you supposed to a mod? Tsk tsk.

 

[ThatRedWing]

Of course, Daddy O is the only Politician to ever use a situation for political benefits. No matter who was in office at that time, they would have made that call. No matter who was in office they would also try to spin it for political gains. It doesn't matter how much you hope for it to happen, nothing ever changes.