The Navy SEAL Who Killed Osama Bin Laden

Osama bin Laden.

11 Feb 2013 13:15 Africa/Lagos

Esquire Publishes First-ever Interview With The Navy SEAL Who Killed Osama Bin Laden
Magazine reveals untold elements of the historic raid as well as the personal aftermath for The Shooter and his family
Story to appear in the March 2013 Issue on Newsstands the week of February 11

NEW YORK, Feb. 11, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- Esquire magazine will publish an exclusive in-depth feature story in the March 2013 issue about the former Navy SEAL Team Six member who killed Osama Bin Laden. The 15,000-word story, "The Shooter," is written by Phil Bronstein, Executive Chair of the Center for Investigative Reporting (the piece was reported in cooperation with CIR), and is based on extensive interviews with the man who killed bin Laden. The story reveals untold, unforgettable details of the historic nighttime raid in May, 2011 at bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, and stands as the definitive account of what happened there that night. It also offers a sobering portrait of life after the military and makes the case that the government largely abandons its most elite and highly-trained soldiers after their service is over. The Navy SEAL, identified as "the Shooter" for his safety and that of his family (and out of respect for his colleagues), told Bronstein his story both to correct the historical record of the bin Laden mission and to put a spotlight on how the United States government treats its most highly-trained and accomplished soldiers once they return to civilian life.

On the day "the Shooter" departed the military after 16 years, he was left with:

No medical insurance for him or his family.
No pension.
No comprehensive assistance in transitioning to civilian life.
No provision for security from the threat of retaliation for himself or his family.
An average wait of nine months for those limited VA benefits that are available to him.

(Note: Had "the Shooter" stayed in for 20 years, he would have been eligible for a pension of $2197.00 per month, the same pension as a member of the Navy choir.)

Please find the complete story here on Esquire.com :
http://www.esquire.com/features/man-who-shot-osama-bin-laden-0313

Bronstein spent more than a year establishing trust and building a rapport with the now-retired Navy SEAL at the center of this story, as well as interviewing several other SEAL Team 6 members. One, a friend of the Shooter, states: "If I get killed on this next deployment, I know my family will be taken care of. But if I come back and retire, I won't have a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of for the rest of my life. Sad to say, it's better if I get killed."

As Bronstein reports: With the American way of war evolving dramatically in the past decade to deal with asymmetrical threats, most of the future fighting will be done not by large contingents of conventional ground forces but with targeted strikes by Special Operations forces such as the Shooter and his colleagues. Consequently, "there will be an increasing number of vets in the Shooter's circumstance: abandoned, with limited choices." This riveting look at a legendary raid and the troubling second chapter for "The Shooter" and his Special Ops peers is a call-to-action: Something must be done.

Phil Bronstein will be a guest on The Today Show at 7:40 on February 11, 2013, to discuss this story. To schedule an interview with Phil Bronstein, Esquire Editor-In-Chief, David Granger or Esquire Executive Editor Mark Warren, or for more information, please contact Adam_Schiff@dkcnews.com.

About Esquire

Esquire (www.esquire.com), published by Hearst Magazines, is the most-honored monthly magazine in America. Over the past 15 years, it has won a total of 16 National Magazine Awards. Its Web site and e-reader applications have been similarly honored—Esquire won the first-ever National Magazine Award for iPad applications. In addition to its U.S. flagship, Esquire publishes 25 editions around the world. Follow Esquire on Twitter at @Esquiremag.

About the Center for Investigative Reporting

Founded in 1977, the Center for Investigative Reporting is the nation's oldest nonprofit investigative news organization, producing unique, high-quality reporting that has impact and is relevant to people's lives. The organization's stories appear in hundreds of news outlets, including NPR News, PBS Frontline, PBS NewsHour, the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, The Washington Post, the San Francisco Chronicle, The Sacramento Bee, Newsweek/The Daily Beast, MinnPost and American Public Media's Marketplace. CIR stories have received numerous journalism awards, including the Alfred I. duPont-Columbia University Silver Baton, George Polk Award, Emmy Award, Investigative Reporters and Editors Award, and the MacArthur Award for Creative and Effective Institutions. Its reports have sparked state and federal hearings and legislation, United Nations resolutions, public-interest lawsuits and changes in corporate policies. For more information, please visit cironline.org, californiawatch.org and baycitizen.org.

SOURCE Esquire

CONTACT: Adam Schiff, DKC, +1-212-981-5216, Adam_Schiff@ dkcnews.com, or Stephanie Tuck, DKC, +1-212-981-5170, Stephanie_Tuck@dkcnews.com

Web Site: http://www.esquire.com

Tweet

U.S. Cost of Violence Surpasses 15% of GDP

New Report Calculates Total U.S. Public and Private Expenditure on Containing Violence -- International & Domestic

NEW YORK, Sept. 20, 2012 /PRNewswire/ --

$2.16 trillion or $15,000 per taxpayer spent on preventing or dealing with violence
Violence-related expenditures four times greater than the Department of Defense budget
If Violence Containment was classified as an industry, would be the largest in the U.S.
Economic value of containing violence in the U.S. equal to the entire GDP of the UK

On the eve of the International Day of Peace, the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) has released a report detailing how much of the U.S. economy is related to either preventing or dealing with the consequences of violence. The report conservatively estimates that in 2010, 15% of GDP or US$15,000 per taxpayer was spent on containing violence. This is the equivalent of 1 out of every 7 dollars spent in the U.S.



The study is the first systematic measure to account for all violence-related expenditure in the U.S. economy. It captures government, corporate, and individual expenditure regardless of whether it is related to international affairs, such as offshore military activities, or domestic spending, for instance, dealing with crime and its consequences.

"By defining a new industry as the 'Violence Containment Industry,' it is now possible to aggregate all expenditures related to the containment or consequences of violence. Our research indicates that when measured as a percentage of GDP this industry has expanded by 25% in the past ten years," stated Steve Killelea, Executive Chairman of IEP.

The report shows that if the $2.16 trillion of Violence Containment spending were represented as a discrete industry, it would be the largest industry in the United States economy, larger than construction, real estate, professional services, or manufacturing.

The study accounts for all expenditure that is related to violence, such as medical expenses, incarceration, police, the military, insurance, homeland security, and the private security industry. Expenditure is also divided by local ($154 billion), state ($101 billion), and federal ($1,305 billion) government as well as private spending by corporations, households, and individuals ($602 billion).

A 5% reduction in Violence Containment spending for 5 years would provide $326 billion. This would exceed the capital needed to rebuild the nation's levees systems, update the energy infrastructure, and complete the upgrading of the nation's school infrastructure. The American Society of Civil Engineers is currently estimating a $134 billion shortfall for the above infrastructure development.

"The study clearly demonstrates that even small reductions in violence and the spending associated with it would result in a meaningful stimulation to the U.S. economy," concluded Mr. Killelea.

Notes to Editors
The full report can be downloaded at www.visionofhumanity.org
Follow on Twitter: @globpeaceindex

About the Institute for Economics and Peace
The Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) is an international non-profit research organization dedicated to shifting the world's focus to peace as a positive, achievable, and tangible measure of human well-being and progress. For more info: www.economicsandpeace.org.

Contact
Michelle Breslauer, IEP, mbreslauer@economicsandpeace.org, +1 (646) 963-2160

Tweet

Veteran War Reporter, Alex Quade Wins Prestigious Edward R. Morrow Journalism Award For Horse Soldiers of 9/11

15 Jun 2012 11:00 Africa/Lagos

Veteran War Reporter, Alex Quade Wins Prestigious Edward R. Morrow Journalism Award For Horse Soldiers of 9/11

WASHINGTON, June 15, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Organizers for the 2012 National Edward R. Murrow Awards have announced that veteran war reporter, Alex Quade's Horse Soldiers of 9/11 has won the award in the category of National Online for Writing.

Horse Soldiers of 9/11 was an original, groundbreaking story for The Daily Caller. The story was later expanded into a short film of the same name, narrated by actor Gary Sinise, and is now being screened at film festivals across the country.

War reporter, Alex Quade has made a career out of "going to bad places" as an embedded reporter. In body armor, helmet and anti-ballistic eyewear protection, she has covered U.S. soldiers in war zones around the globe including Iraq and Afghanistan. Extreme storytelling and silent risk-taking lie at the heart of what she does.

It was in her capacity as a war reporter that Alex tracked down the elite commandos who first rode horses into Afghanistan after 9/11. Those secretive teams of U.S. Special Operations Forces, including Green Berets, Air Force Special Operations Combat Controllers and CIA Operatives, shared their stories with Alex.

It was the news the world breathlessly waited for immediately after the 9/11 terror attacks: a report of the first American troops on the ground in Afghanistan. All at once the world's attention focused on an iconic photo of small teams of U.S. Special Operations Forces doing something no American military had done in nearly a century: ride horses into combat. That photo would go on to inspire an artist to sculpt an 18 ft. tall monument at Ground Zero ten years later.

The courage of the first into battle is what guarantees the courage of those that follow: Horse Soldiers of 9/11 by war reporter, Alex Quade.

For more information about the 2012 National Edward R. Murrow Awards, please go to www.rtnda.org.

WHO: War reporter, Alex Quade, Edward R. Murrow Award winner for Horse Soldiers of 9/11 , Producer & Director of the short film, Horse Soldiers of 9/11.

WHAT: Winner of the 2012 National Edward R. Murrow Award in the category for National Online writing.

SOURCE Alex Quade
CONTACT: Cherry Hepburn, +1-818-505-1104, +1-818-471-7079 (cell)

Tweet

Majority of Americans want U.S. troops to leave Afghanistan now that Osama bin Laden is dead

8 Jun 2011 11:04 Africa/Lagos


52% - 35% Majority Believes U.S. Should Leave Afghanistan Faster Now That Bin Laden Is Dead

Majority also favors making aid to Pakistan conditional on cooperation on pursuing Al Qaeda and the Taliban

PR Newswire

NEW YORK, June 8, 2011

NEW YORK, June 8, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- A new BBC World News America/Harris Poll finds that a majority of Americans (52%) believe that the United States should move to get its troops out of Afghanistan now that Osama bin Laden is dead. However, 35% believe that U.S. troops should stay according to the existing plans. Reasons why most people favor withdrawing U.S. troops may be that a 51% to 14% majority of adults are not confident that U.S. policies in Afghanistan will be successful, and only 19% see the Afghan government as either an ally or a friend to the U.S. and 36% see it as unfriendly and an enemy.

(Logo: http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20100517/NY06256LOGO )

These are some of the findings of a new BBC World News America/ Harris Poll of 2,027 U.S. adults surveyed online between May 31 and June 2, 2011 by Harris Interactive.

Other interesting findings in the poll include:

* A large 66% to 20% majority of adults believes that it was better to have killed Osama bin Laden than to have captured him;
* An even larger 66% to 18% majority believe that "if the United States has very reliable information that a nationally wanted terrorist or criminal like Osama bin Laden is located in a foreign country.... that we have the right to perform a military operation within that country without notifying the government";
* The public is split on the impact of the killing of bin Laden on world opinion, with 41% thinking that it has made the United States more respected and 41% thinking has made no difference. Only 7% believe that it has made the U.S. less respected;
* Israel continues to enjoy very strong support among Americans, with 41% of adults seeing it as a close ally and a further 30% as a friend;
* The fall of Hosni Mubarak in Egypt have done nothing to improve U.S. attitudes to its government. In fact those who see the government of Egypt as a close ally or friend (43%) are somewhat lower now than when this question was asked in 2009 (52%) and 2010 (49%);
* More people see Pakistan as unfriendly and an enemy (29%) than as a friend or ally (20%); and,
* Many more people see the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan as unfriendly and enemies (38% and 36% respectively) than as friends or allies (22% and 19%). Attitudes to these two countries are only marginally less negative than they are to the government of Syria (16% friend or ally and 38% unfriendly and an enemy).


So What?

The killing of Osama bin Laden has done little to change the generally negative attitudes of Americans to the role of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Only 14% of adults are confident that U.S. policies there will be successful, virtually unchanged since two Harris polls in June and October last year.

Perhaps the most surprising findings in this poll are that many more people regard the governments of Afghanistan and Iraq as unfriendly and an enemy than as friends or allies, even though they were brought to power as a result of the U.S. invasions and have been kept in power by the presence of US troops.


Click here for more details.

Top Headlines

52% - 35% Majority Believes U.S. Should Leave Afghanistan Faster Now That Bin Laden Is Dead

Confused.com Reveals 56% of Drivers Forget Where They Park

TripAdvisor Showcases America's Top 10 Wackiest Summer Events

Report Criticizes DEA for Failing to Address Online Pharmacy Problem

J.D. Power and Associates Reports: Customer Satisfaction with Airlines Increases for a Second Consecutive Year, But Gains Are Tempered By Dissatisfaction with Costs and Fees among Traditional Network Carriers

Zagat Releases 2011/12 Connecticut Dining Guide

Father's Day

E3 2011

Is the death of Osama bin Laden FACT or FICTION?

The photo of Osama bin Laden before his death.

Speculations are spreading in the Arab world and among millions of Muslims in Nigeria that President Barack Obama and his administration have lied to the ignorant and innocent citizens of the United States and the rest of the world that they have killed Osama bin Laden, the founder and leader of the dreaded global militant Islamist group al-Qa'ida.


President Barack Obama

Many cynics, skeptics and conspiracy theorists have been questioning the authenticity of the claim that Osama bin Laden was actually “Killed In Action” (EKIA) by a 24-man U.S. Navy SEALs task force and aircrews from the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment -- the "Nightstalkers" in one of the rooms on the third-floor bedroom of a comfortable house in a building in Abbottobad, a suburb of Islamabad, Pakistan on May Day, 2011.

The highly respected Nigerian Islamic scholar Afis Oladosu also raised the issue on The “second death” of Osama bin Laden published on Friday, May 6 2011 of the Friday Worship column in The Guardian newspaper of Nigeria.

Kawther Salam, the notable Palestinian journalist from Hebron is the most outspoken of the cynics, skeptics and conspiracy theorists who are saying that President Obama and his administration should tell their story to the marines!

The following is from Kawther Salam.

"One among many “small problems with this show is, Osama is reportedly dead since 16 December 2001. It was reported in June of 2001 that Osama was hospitalized because of kidney problems and that he received a visit of CIA employees in the hospital. In December 2001 an obituary was published in an Egyptian newspaper. And the holes in the story only become bigger the more one looks. To support the narrative of the US government, the AP agency first published and then retired a picture of the supposedly dead Bin Laden. The picture is below, together with another Osama bin Laden picture. If you look, you can notice that the picture on the left, purported to be a portrait of the dead OBL, is obviously a Photoshop job of the undistorted picture on the right. The picture on the left appears to be a composite of Osama’s head and details from the picture of a cadaver of unknown provenience, probably an Iraqi victim since many pictures of dead Iraqis have been published in the past by US soldiers. It is also obvious that the AP picture has been worked on with a blurring filter.

The photo of Osama bin Laden at death that Kawther Salam said is fake.

The fakery around Osama bin Laden is very interesting before the background that American citizens investigating the 9/11 attack have found that the list of victims of that crime published by CNN appears to be a vast catalog of false, composite identities. They have published a so-called “Vicsim Report” (“Vicsim” = Victim Simulation”) which includes many examples of manipulation of pictures and other personal details of purported victims. Another hole in the story published is the almost immediate DNA identification purported to have been performed. According to this article, it would take about two days to confirm an identification done with help of DNA (if a reader knows otherwise, please post a comment.)

Abottabad (link to Google map), the city in northern Pakistan where Osama was supposedly killed yesterday, lies sprawled along a valley, it has about 300.000 inhabitants. The city appears to be neither remote nor underdeveloped. It has many schools and other educational institutes, several hospitals, paved roads, government offices, a golf course, other modern amenities and several big military compounds. It appears inconceivable that Osama bin Laden could live for “years” in such a place without having come to the attention to the massive intelligence service of Pakistan. Several hundred meters immediately north of one of the probable locations of the house which was raided yesterday lies the campus the “COMSATS Institute of Information Technology”, a professional education institute whose Islamabad branch was visited on April 25 by British Prime Minister David Cameron. Whatever the Prime Minister was doing in Islamabad, it is doubtful that he traveled halfways around the globe to merely give some nice a speech in exactly the school which has a branch next to the raided house. The emissaries of empire always afford their tribute, be it in blood or otherwise."

You can also read Mark Dean's doubts in MADHOUSE: The Obama Omniscience on why Americans are asking their first black President for photos to authenticate his claims! From doubting the authenticity of his birth certificate, they are now doubting his claim of killing Osama bin Laden!

No one should ignore Alex Jones who even produced the YouTube video to expose ("the contrived "victory" in the War on Terror surrounding a man who many experts have said was already dead for years. After nearly a decade of "hunting" for Bin Laden, he is summarily shot in the head and allegedly dumped into the ocean (conveniently making the body unavailable). So goes the official life of Osama bin Laden (aka Tim Osman), one of the CIA's most useful patsies and assets.)



The testimony of Alex Jones supports that of Kawther Salam that the "second death" of Osama bin Laden is a hoax. But on May 6, 2011, "al-Qaeda acknowledged his death and concurrently vowed to retaliate."

Would President Barack Obama lie to the world and risk being impeached and vilified as the most dishonest President in the history of America? Imagine the grave consequences of such a calamity on the United States of America and the black race?


~ By Ekenyerengozi Michael Chima

Middle-East News Update

NEWSWEEK Cover: What Bush Got Right

In the August 18-25 double issue of Newsweek (on newsstands Monday, August 11): "What Bush Got Right." Fareed Zakaria assesses what President Bush has done right in American foreign policy that his successors might choose to emulate or continue. Plus: the jingoism of Chinese who return to the homeland after living overseas; Fannie, Freddie and the subprime mess that might have been avoided; an interview with T. Boone Pickens; and videogame players no longer on the margins of the industry. (PRNewsFoto/NEWSWEEK) NEW YORK, NY UNITED STATES 08/10/2008

10 Aug 2008 16:05 Africa/Lagos

NEWSWEEK Cover: What Bush Got Right

Fareed Zakaria Looks At President Bush's Successes In American Foreign Policy; 'Blanket Criticism Of Bush Misses An Important Reality'

The Foreign Policies In Place Now 'Are More Sensible, Moderate And Mainstream. In Many Cases The Next President Should Follow Rather Than Reverse Them'

NEW YORK, Aug. 10 /PRNewswire/ -- A broad shift in America's approach to the world is justified and overdue, writes Newsweek International Editor Fareed Zakaria in the current issue. President Bush's basic conception of a "global War on Terror," to take but the most obvious example, "has been poorly thought-through, badly implemented, and has produced many unintended costs that will linger for years if not decades. But blanket criticism of Bush misses an important reality."


(Photo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20080810/NYSU004 )


He writes that for "whatever reasons and through whichever path, the foreign policies in place now are more sensible, moderate and mainstream. In many cases the next president should follow rather then reverse them."


Zakaria examines the administration's successes in American foreign policy, while also noting its failures, in the August 18-25 cover "What Bush Did Right" (on newsstands Monday, August 11). "The administration that became the target of so much passion and anger -- from Democrats, Republicans, independents, foreigners, Martians, everyone -- is not quite the one in place today. The foreign policies that aroused the greatest anger and opposition were mostly pursued in Bush's first term: the invasion of Iraq, the rejection of treaties, diplomacy and multilateralism. In the last few years, many of these policies have been modified, abandoned or reversed. This has happened without acknowledgment -- which is partly what drives critics crazy -- and it's often been done surreptitiously. It doesn't reflect a change of heart so much as an admission of failure; the old way simply wasn't working."


He writes: "Consider as a symbol of this shift Bush's appointment of the World Bank's president. His first choice for the job was Paul Wolfowitz, an arch neoconservative with little background in economics. But by the time Wolfowitz was forced to resign and the post opened up again, Bush realized that he needed a less ideological choice, and he picked the highly qualified and respected Robert Zoellick. Where Dick Cheney was once the poster child for the administration, today policy is being run by Condoleezza Rice, Robert Gates, Stephen Hadley and Hank Paulson -- all pragmatists. Change has not extended to all areas, and in many places it's been too little, too late. But that there has been a shift to the center in many crucial areas of foreign policy is simply undeniable."


All this is not meant as a defense of George W. Bush, Zakaria writes. He offers this corrective "because we cannot go back to 2001. The next president will inherit the world as it is in 2009. He will have to examine the Bush administration's policies as they stand in January 2009 -- not as they were in 2001 or 2002 or 2003 -- and decide how to accept, modify and alter them. There was a U.S. president who came into office convinced that everything his predecessor had done was feckless, stupid, ill-informed and venal. He rejected and tried to reverse everything that he could, almost as an article of faith. Before he had even examined the policies carefully, he knew that they had to be changed. The base of his party was delighted by his clarity and fighting spirit.


"That president, of course, was George W. Bush. His decision to blindly repudiate anything associated with Bill Clinton is what got us into this mess in the first place. Let's hope that the next president, no matter how much he despises Bush, will take a careful look at his administration's policies, America's interests, and the world beyond and do the right thing for the country and its future."


http://www.newsweek.com/id/151731


(Read the cover story at www.Newsweek.com )


Photo: NewsCom: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20080810/NYSU004
AP Archive: http://photoarchive.ap.org/
AP PhotoExpress Network: PRN1
PRN Photo Desk, photodesk@prnewswire.com
Source: Newsweek

CONTACT: Jan Angilella of Newsweek, +1-212-445-5638


Web site: Newsweek


HIGHLY RECOMMENDED: The Nigerian Fools Who Think They Can Fool God

Description:
Critical Commentaries and Essays with Humourous Anecdotes on the Nigerian Society, Focusing on Education, Romance, Marriage, Religion, Politics and other matters.

ISBN: 978-1-4404-0128-2
Publisher: Nigerian Times International
Copyright: © 2008 Ekenyerengozi Michael Chima
Standard Copyright License
Language: English
Country: Nigeria
Edition: First Edition

Keywords:
democracy
Religion
corruption
politics
nigeria
Listed in:
History