Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
August 2, 2011
The New Yorker On The Raid In Abbottabad

Inside a New Yorker piece which tells the official "inside" story of the Bin Laden raid in Abbottabad the U.S. government wants you to know.

There is at least one quite unbelievable detail in it. The SEALs that went in had a translator with them who's role was to keep locals off during the raid.

A Pakistani-American translator, whom I will call Ahmed, and a dog named Cairo—a Belgian Malinois—were also aboard.
[…]
Not everyone on the team was accustomed to helicopter assaults. Ahmed had been pulled from a desk job for the mission and had never descended a fast rope. He quickly learned the technique.
[…]
As long as everything was cordial, Ahmed would hold curious neighbors at bay.
[…]
Outside the compound’s walls, Ahmed, the translator, patrolled the dirt road in front of bin Laden’s house, as if he were a plainclothes Pakistani police officer. He looked the part, wearing a shalwar kameez atop a flak jacket.
[…]
Eventually, a few curious Pakistanis approached to inquire about the commotion on the other side of the wall. “Go back to your houses,” Ahmed said, in Pashto, as Cairo stood watch. “There is a security operation under way.” The locals went home, none of them suspecting that they had talked to an American. When journalists descended on Bilal Town in the coming days, one resident told a reporter, “I saw soldiers emerging from the helicopters and advancing toward the house. Some of them instructed us in chaste Pashto to turn off the lights and stay inside.”

After 10 years of continuous fighting in Afghanistan the Special Forces do not have an operational Pashto speaker but have to draft a desk jokey? And why was the translator used a "chaste Pashto" speaker? The common languages in Pakistan, the lingua franca, are Urdu and English and then there is this fact:

According to the 1998 Census of the 881,000 who resided in the Abbottabad District, Hindko was spoken by 94.26% of the population, followed by Potohari at 2.30%, Pashto at 2.22% and Urdu at 1.05%. Although the first language of most people in the district is Hindko, Urdu is understood and spoken fluently by majority of the residents and commonly used in markets, offices and formal functions. English is widely used in business and education.

If that account in the New Yorker is true it was a major planning mistake and screw up to send a Pashto speaker with the special forces instead of an Urdu speaker. For an important operation planned over months this sounds unbelievable.

There is also this curious wording in New Yorker piece:

Back in Abbottabad, residents of Bilal Town and dozens of journalists converged on bin Laden’s compound, and the morning light clarified some of the confusion from the previous night. Black soot from the detonated Black Hawk charred the wall of the animal pen. Part of the tail hung over the wall. It was clear that a military raid had taken place there. “I’m glad no one was hurt in the crash, but, on the other hand, I’m sort of glad we left the helicopter there,” the special-operations officer said. “It quiets the conspiracy mongers out there and instantly lends credibility. You believe everything else instantly, because there’s a helicopter sitting there.”

Hmm. So if you wanted to make everyone believe instantly that the raid in Abbottabad really happened as we are told what would you do?

Comments

It’s quite fishy that there was no attempt to take OBL alive.
The need for info to fight ‘terror’ supposedly justifies police state tactics from monitoring everyone’s phones and computers to torture … but they had no interest in interrogating OBL?

Posted by: Watson | Aug 2 2011 12:32 utc | 1

It is also clear that from MSM accounts he was shot in cold blood. Then whisked off to sea? Really! I’m sure an embedded journalist in one of the units involved could vouch for at least part of that story. Sure!

Posted by: Jake | Aug 2 2011 13:27 utc | 2

To me, “no attempt to take OBL alive” is one of the few aspects of the story that seems entirely creditable.
You do know that police state tactics have literally nothing to do with suppressing or investigating terrorism, don’t you?

Posted by: Mang | Aug 2 2011 14:39 utc | 3

B
Well, being a Pashto speaker doesn’t preclude one also being an Urdu speaker.
That said, any “offficial” account, whether on or off the record, is going to be chock-full of disinformation; I don’t think that there’s anything arcane about that.
Broadly speaking, the biggest “tells” in the whole affair have been the official Pakistani reactions – a bunch of guiltier schoolboys would be hard to find.

Posted by: dan | Aug 2 2011 14:41 utc | 4

Well, not only was he a Pashto translator, he addressed people in the Urdu-speaking city in Pashto. So it’s unlikely his Urdu is competent.
By the way, Urdu is an Indic language descended from Sanksrit, whereas Pashto is an Iranian language, so the two languages are only distantly related.

Posted by: lysias | Aug 2 2011 18:47 utc | 5

It does make me wonder how our best and brightest could be so damn reckless and extraordinarily incompetent as to crash a fairly slow moving helicopter into a wall at bin Laden’s Pakistani compound. Do “Keystone Kops” come to mind here? This alone should cause us to raise our collective eyebrows as to whether or not Barack Obama, our Assassin-in-Chief, is telling us the truth about how his CIA-trained assassins killed Bin Laden or even about whether or not they actually killed him.
I wouldn’t be feeling as though Obama is lying to us had he not changed his story so many times and not left so many questions unanswered with regards to bin Laden’s assassination. It’s better that Obama come clean on this before it snowballs into a criminal case against him. As he and other political leaders should have learned from Watergate, the coverup is often worse than the crime itself.

Posted by: Cynthia | Aug 2 2011 19:05 utc | 6

I caught a brief moment of the author of the article on a program I can’t even remember. He was describing how it was Obama who insisted on having back up choppers on hand just in case something went wrong. The military were going to go with no back up –some happy horse hockey puck story, but Wise Obama saw the error in not having redundancy. “We have to be able to bring out people home,” he is said to have insisted.
Oh, pleeeeeze. That was so over the top I clicked away. Besides I was falling asleep.

Posted by: jawbone | Aug 2 2011 20:54 utc | 7

The man picked is described as a “Pakistani-American”, ie, a former Pakistani who is an American citizen. If so, he would most probably know Urdu. I think the “chaste Pashto” bit is a mistake made by the author.
Other than that, the account appears quite plausible. It is certainly the most detailed account I have read. There is no reason to doubt that the writer had access to most of the participants — as he claims.

Posted by: FB Ali | Aug 2 2011 22:17 utc | 8

The question which comes to mind about the Abbottabad raid is the one inspired by most other highly publicised US “secret victory” fairy tales…
If it was such a good idea, the results would speak for themselves. So why bother telling us how clever and significant it was?

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 3 2011 4:27 utc | 9

I still do not believe one thing we are told about this raid. I do not know what did happen. I do not know what did not happen. But nothing we have been told makes even internal sense–it is worse than pure rumor or speculation. Surely everything we have been told in the media is a lie.
–Gaianne

Posted by: Gaianne | Aug 3 2011 6:25 utc | 10

Turns out Nicholas Schmidle, the author of the New Yorker piece, is the son of Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Robert E. Schmidle Jr., the deputy commander of the U.S. Cyber Command, and that he got the information in his article from people in the military who had allegedly debriefed the SEALs who were on the mission.
So, a lot of this could well be disinformation. (Although New Yorker editor David Remnick says his fact-checkers checked everything in the article with Schmidle’s sources. That doesn’t necessarily imply that they were telling the truth.)

Posted by: lysias | Aug 3 2011 16:23 utc | 11

Schmidle could have been telling the absolute truth according to his sources who could have been lying to him and the new yorker. i’m w/Gaianne. i don’t believe a word of it. the chances binny was there? .001

Posted by: annie | Aug 4 2011 1:08 utc | 12

I don’t know that they would want Osama being interrogated. From what I heard about the 911 event that whitnesses that survived the incident heard bombs going off and evidence was found of sulfur and thermite at the building. If it were discovered he he wasn’t part of it then what would they do? Hmm let me find the video.
http://www.youtube.com/user/AlienScientist
I guess you decide what you think of the evidence they provide.

Posted by: DustMan | Aug 4 2011 4:13 utc | 13

A good post by C. Christine Fair on the Schmidle article: The Schmidle Muddle of the Osama Bin Laden Take Down

Posted by: b | Aug 4 2011 13:14 utc | 14

Thanks for following up on the New Yorker “short fiction”. Establishing the bona fides and qualifications (or lack thereof) of young journalists is always pertinent. The story remains interesting even if it is rather more as an exemplar of “approved reading” than as a pipeline to “inside information”,
much less an authentic historical document. Presumably the author will continue to have “access” to “reliable sources”, and may even produce something surprising and truly informative in the future.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Aug 4 2011 14:07 utc | 15

Forgot to close the italics. To make better use of this second post, let me thank b once again for excellent links. Before “social network” became synonymous with “Facebook” or one of its knockoffs, the site http://www.namebase.org provided handy little “social network diagrams” like this. It still does. The resulting network graphs are limited in that they are created using a data base consisting of books, newspapers, etc. (but apparently excluding websites?). So the output is far from a perfect picture of relationships among the “great and famous”, but still seems useful.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Aug 4 2011 14:26 utc | 16

Re: Schmidle Muddle of the Obasm Bin Laden Take Down, I had just rushed over here to post about it. To find I should have scrolled down yesterday and would have been able to read it earlier.
I had googled “Nicholas Schmidle” after reading b’s post, but found nothing with any real information about him. I had wanted to know his birthdate since he looked so very young on the program where I’d seen him.
I think he’s a plant from military domestic psyops — just global psyops.

Posted by: jawbone | Aug 5 2011 16:17 utc | 17

Oh, sheesh. I need a better proofreader!

Posted by: jawbone | Aug 5 2011 16:18 utc | 18

Xymphora has an intriguing angle on the relevance of the crashed chopper part of the Abbottabad story.
It would be hilarious if they got a living Osama on the helicopter and then had to make up the ‘buried at sea’ story in order to cover up for the helicopter crash. Rather than omnipotent heroes, they may just be a band of incompetent goofs.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 8 2011 14:05 utc | 19