Intel shows bin Laden held firm control

Intel shows bin Laden held firm control

www.stripes.com

In a detailed Pentagon briefing Saturday, a senior intelligence official said analysts already have discovered “important insights” in the huge intelligence cache found in bin Laden’s Abbottabad, Pakistan, hide-out.

They searched first for immediate threats to the United States and its interests, including to American troops in Afghanistan, and for any links to other al-Qaida members.

The official would not reveal if the U.S. had taken direct military or other actions on any targets based on information found in the material.

“The materials reviewed over the past several days

(visit the link for the full news article)

This article is a pretty good synopsis about the materials recovered in the raid on the OBL compound. It alludes to the fact that there was actionable intel discovered but remains vague about the details.

In addition, it touches a bit on the videos that the Pentagon released today, as this was part of the same media briefing.

"The official said 'the single largest collection of senior terrorist materials, ever'”

Senior terrorist? Does anyone know what that might mean? As in not junior terrorist?

Here's an insight into how they are working the recovered materials in a joint effort.

To mine the material, the U.S. has set up a task force including the CIA, Department of Homeland Security, Treasury Department, Defense Intelligence Agency, the FBI, National Security Agency and others. Officials would not say how long it will take to review the entire collection of materials. Indeed, the U.S. is still quantifying just how much material it has.

This report also touches on the DNA analysis.


www.stripes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by ~Lucidity


If this is true, its a massive surprise

Everyone was thinking that he had no operational control over Al’Qa’ida. I still can’t see how it makes sense unless he had control over the branch Al’Qa’ida groups. I wonder if this is propaganda if its ture.

reply to post by kevinunknown

What Stars n Stripes is reporting here is from the press conference this morning. Same one they released the videos at. That was the impression I had as well about his control. It's definitely a red flag.

Here's another report on this from NTI Global Security Newswire...hmm...dated yesterday.

www.globalsecuritynewswire.org...

"He wasn’t just a figurehead," an anonymous U.S. official said. "He continued to plot and plan, to come up with ideas about targets and to communicate those ideas to other senior Qaeda leaders."

"Until now, the prevailing wisdom was that he was hiding in a remote, isolated mountain range and cut off from his followers" Georgetown University al-Qaeda expert Bruce Hoffman said. "Now we know that was all wrong and reconsider what his role really was."

Also a description of al-Qaeda's "key personalities." www.globalsecurity.org...

Intel shows bin Laden held firm control

Firm control of what? The TV remote?

If this information was true, it would not have been released because it would severely compromise any further investigation into these alleged terrerrists. Do law enforcement officials comment on ongoing murder investigations?

Notice how all this bogus information is being released on the weekend, which is a slow news day? They figure that if fewer people see this rubbish, the less it will be questioned. All standard tricks of the trade by a one trick pony which has gone to the well once too often.

reply to post by SphinxMontreal

the tapes showed him with a remote, so you may be right!

There are two ways to look at it, I suppose? They announced that they got "stuff" out of the compound. This could work to to either thwart or slow down whatever operations may have been in progress, or as you said, clue them in so they change their plans just enough to evade. I highly doubt an organization as "sophisticated" as we've been led to believe would keep all their cookies in one basket. The first rule of any intel or terrorist operation is compartmentalize compartmentalize compartmentalize.

We are conspiracy theorists. To us, Any info released by big brother is bull#.

reply to post by jrcris2011

Right on.

However we need a very firm understanding of the "official story" before we can begin to poke holes in it, don't we?

If we start with a premise that is flawed, our analysis will be flawed as well.

reply to post by jrcris2011


Speak for yourself.

Some of the stuff coming out seems to contradict a lot of the stuff we've been told about Bin Laden.

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


Have to agree.
Out with it then,why dont they show us?
Thats right its an ongoing investigation,
So why say anything? To keep the fear alive,i bet the documents reveal plans of "Untold devastation"planned against Americans.
Believe what we tell you,we are the gov.

By the way,link in op 404ed me.Went to the site but it 404ed the page! mmmm

reply to post by iceblue20-12

It 404'd? Are you serious? Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr...I know this works. www.stripes.com...

I also checked the link in the OP. (And copied the entire article via screenshots because I'm paranoid.)

Thanks.

Here's the story from the National Journal....

www.nationaljournal.com...

“Suffice it to say, this compound in Abbottabad was an active command and control center for al-Qaida’s top leader,” the official added. “What we’ve gone through so far shows he was actively involved in plotting operations and directing the daily operations of the group. He was not simply someone who was penning al-Qaida strategy. He was throwing operational ideas out there and directing other al-Qaida terrorists.”

Now, help me figure out whether this data bit that said he had no internet or phone service there was a rumor or part of the official story.

The official who spoke on condition of anonymity said bin Laden continued to have a particular interest in attacks on transportation facilities and other types of infrastructure, the type of targets al-Qaida has hit in the past. He says bin Laden managed to run his organization through couriers, like the one who unwittingly led U.S. investigators to the compound, which had no telephone or Internet service. www.voanews.com...

Maybe he had a satellite card? Anyone know?

You have to assume that if it was "an active command and control center" that there would be internet service of some sort. And cell phones...satellite or otherwise. I thought we have technology that can intercept calls? Were there calls out of there (even if they were scrambled)? One would think the CIA next door with all their sophisticated equipment would have known.

I think propaganda more then intel info. I could be wrong..but when the State Department gets involved...we're already so far away from the truth, game over.

"Dear Diary,
I'm going to try and talk Mo and Sindi into talking Gary into blowing himself up."

"As long as everyone dies away from ME, I should be safe." "Will write more later."

Originally posted by jrcris2011
We are conspiracy theorists. To us, Any info released by big brother is bull#.

The reactionary rejection of anything deemed 'official' is not a sign of intelligence, but a sign of its own kind of Dogma for those who need t believe they 'know'.

I am comfortable admitting I dont know.

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Originally posted by jrcris2011
We are conspiracy theorists. To us, Any info released by big brother is bull#.

The reactionary rejection of anything deemed 'official' is not a sign of intelligence, but a sign of its own kind of Dogma for those who need t believe they 'know'.

I am comfortable admitting I dont know.

All I know is, that the "officials" don't have a very good record of telling the truth, do they?

And why do you think that is? Just a thought....

Perhaps the "officials" have their own dogma with their own agenda.

Question Authority

reply to post by SphinxMontreal


They have to make the public believe that he was alive recently, that he was very much in control of Al Qaeda, and that essentially with his death, so dies Al Qaeda.

The reason is Al Qaeda was going to be used as a scapegoat in an upcoming series of devastating attacks, with a convenient fabricated claim of responsibility from Osama himself, and the world would have believed it.

They have bought some time by killing their "boogyman", that is all.

Hope it was worth the price.

reply to post by ~Lucidity


As usual you made a great thread with tons of info!

The official would not reveal if the U.S. had taken direct military or other actions on any targets based on information found in the material.

I think they already have hit at least two targets based on their new intel. There was a drone strike in Pakistan that killed 12 a few days after the OBL announcement, and another one in Yemen a day or two ago. But you never know.

reply to post by tooo many pills


This? www.activistpost.com...

Strange behavior, to say the least. Makes you wonder what kind of game they're playing here.

Originally posted by ~Lucidity

This article is a pretty good synopsis about the materials recovered in the raid on the OBL compound. It alludes to the fact that there was actionable intel discovered but remains vague about the details.

In addition, it touches a bit on the videos that the Pentagon released today, as this was part of the same media briefing.

"The official said 'the single largest collection of senior terrorist materials, ever'”

Senior terrorist? Does anyone know what that might mean? As in not junior terrorist?

Here's an insight into how they are working the recovered materials in a joint effort.

To mine the material, the U.S. has set up a task force including the CIA, Department of Homeland Security, Treasury Department, Defense Intelligence Agency, the FBI, National Security Agency and others. Officials would not say how long it will take to review the entire collection of materials. Indeed, the U.S. is still quantifying just how much material it has.

This report also touches on the DNA analysis.


www.stripes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 5/7/2011 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)

The "official" account.

Materials *supposedly* recovered and OBL's "supposed" home/command center/compound, would be a better way to explain it. Even though you say

we need a very firm understanding of the "official story" before we can begin to poke holes in it, don't we?

which is true, i find it interesting that you base the premise on your argument on "intel that was found." We know nothing, only what the US government has "officially" told us, which, based upon its history, is about as reliable as a moth-eaten life raft.

To say that OBL's supposed compound was the command post is, IMO, laughable and suspect. Personally, i highly doubt that OBL was in "command" of much of anything (as it is made out), if these accounts were supposedly true, but that is my opinion. While he may have had some influence in certain things, and possibly even operations, it seems more likely that he had resigned himself to a sort of retirement (assuming he lived there), and was holed up because he knew if he stuck his head out he would be killed. This is however, all based on the assumption that the official story is accurate. He might have had some influence, but i highly doubt he was the equivalent of a general calling the shots, simply because the taliban and al quaeda are more than likely not organized in ranks like we perceive, but rather a more-or-less disconnected bunch of angry extremists with a common goal.

And if he DID have a command center, and if he did have some type of technologically based connection with his underlings (whether satellite, phone, etc), one would think he would be very much vulnerable to interception and found out a lot sooner, considering the interceptions of media transmission and its insecurity and vulnerability. We have some of the most sophisticated surveillance and electronic interceptions available, and we don't get this, except when some courier finally make a phone call hat tips us off (even though CIA was next door for how long).

“Suffice it to say, this compound in Abbottabad was an active command and control center for al-Qaida’s top leader,” the official added. “What we’ve gone through so far shows he was actively involved in plotting operations and directing the daily operations of the group. He was not simply someone who was penning al-Qaida strategy. He was throwing operational ideas out there and directing other al-Qaida terrorists.”

above source

I have an extremely hard time believing that and the official version and facts.

You have to assume that if it was "an active command and control center" that there would be internet service of some sort. And cell phones...satellite or otherwise. I thought we have technology that can intercept calls? Were there calls out of there (even if they were scrambled)? One would think the CIA next door with all their sophisticated equipment would have known.

Oh, and i completely agree with that, which is why i am totally suspect at the "official" version and "official" facts. Things just seemed to be, even with the contradictory official accounts, too conveniently lined up. That doesn't mean it isn't true, no but it's just too convenient and therefore, IMO, highly suspect and therefore mostly unreliable.

Like, the US hit the jackpot (which was not simply OBL), even when they had CIA supposedly living next door, and all of a sudden they have vids, intel, command center, plots, etc. And no one knew the whole time?

Something stinks.

Something is highly suspect.

And the official versions make little sense to me. It's too convenient, and toes the official line too well.

~~~

But all this is simply my opinion, as i see the events and supposed facts when trying to connect events and dots with a rational perspective..




ETA: And it is extremely hard to understand the official story when it keeps changing, unless by its change it helps us understand (and not not because it becomes clearer as it progresses but because it illuminates the fact that the official story is not concrete due to its change and contradictions).

Sometimes the official story is only understood by its inconsistencies, not by the story--or the "facts" within--itself.