OPSEC – Press release – Scott Taylor statement

Editor’s Note – Chad Kolton, representing OpSecteam.org, has released the following statement from Scott Taylor, President of OPSEC:

OPSEC: Threatened prosecution of a war hero but reluctant investigation of Senior Administration officials on leaks is a dishonorable double standard

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Scott Taylor, president of OPSEC, issued the following statement in response to media reports that the Department of Defense had threatened to prosecute a former SEAL Team 6 member and author of No Easy Day:

“The author is an American hero but the rules about disclosing sensitive information have to be applied to everyone. OPSEC was among the first to call for action to prevent the book’s publication until it could be properly cleared.

“However, the Obama Administration is applying a dishonorable double standard with a lightning quick threat to prosecute a five-time winner of the Bronze Star while dragging its feet in identifying and charging senior administration officials who have purposefully leaked classified information.

“A culture of leaks has developed over the past few years because it has become very clear that President Obama and his senior team not only will tolerate leaks and politicization of Intelligence and Special Operations missions, they will actively engage in them if it serves a political purpose.

“From showing satellite photos to media, to disclosing the existence of a double-agent in AQAP, to publicizing classified or sensitive details of the OBL raid, senior Obama Administration officials have repeatedly violated their commitments on classified or sensitive data with impunity.

“If President Obama is going to pursue an immediate and vigorous prosecution of American war heroes he should hold his senior aides to the exact same standard.”


Here is the letter sent by the General Counsel: Letter to Mark Owens

"Pipe Down" – Legal threats to the active and retired

Editor’s Note – With all the furor over the “Dishonorable Disclosures” video created by OPSECteam.org, a new book is due for release on September 11, 2012 that purports to tell the inside story of the Osama bin Laden raid. We do not know the tenor of the book but leaks of classified material have really caused a lot of harm to date, and Americans of all stripes are ‘piping hot’ mad, especially over the politicization of the events.

Now this book is raising a lot of eye brows because contents were not vetted by the Pentagon, which is a required procedure. Penguine Group, the publisher has/had an obligation to submit the transcripts to the Department of Defense for approval.

What else can, or perhaps should be said is, the author, writing under a pseudonym until some in the media revealed his identity, which SUA will not, has likely taken a hit for the team. A possible effort to reveal some real truths of the Osama bin Laden event, perhaps as a countermeasure to the “Zero Dark 30” movie being released this Fall that gives glory to the White House.

From Yahoo News:

The former Navy SEAL who penned a firsthand account of the mission to kill Osama bin Laden did so without the permission of the U.S. government, officials said, and is now at the center of an ongoing controversy within the secretive special operations community over unauthorized disclosures.

The author of the book, who writes under the pseudonym Mark Owen, was a SEAL Team Six team leader during the mission that took out the al Qaeda leader and was “one of the first men through the door on the third floor of the terrorist leader’s hideout,” according to a statement from the book’s publisher, Dutton.

The Pentagon is awaiting a copy of the book to determine if it does contain material not suitable for publication. It appears they will likely find a lot to be concerned over, but we cannot know that at this time.

Leaks have already been many, and the determination of who leaked them is unknown, but the White House has been implicated. In response to these leaks and the political picture it painted, many retired CIA Agents, Navy Seals, and military command staff produced the video mentioned above. Naturally, there is a lot of consternation and many negative responses by supporters of the President, and by the President himself.

Recently, the man who made the real “gutsy call“, Admiral William McRaven, was refferred to as a General by President Obama about his ‘reverence’ for the Special Operations troops after being questioned about the OPSEC video: 

… Obama’s slip in an interview with KSDK in St Louis, Missouri when he was asked about the new 22-minute film ‘Dishonorable Disclosures’ by a group of former Special Forces troops and intelligence operatives.

‘I won’t take this film too seriously,’ he responded. ‘I gather that one of the producers is a birther who still doesn’t think I was born in this country.


‘I’d advise that you talk to General McRaven, who’s in charge of our Special Ops. I think he has a point of view in terms of how deeply I care about what these folks do each and every day to protect our freedom.’

The difficulty with this is that William McRaven is and admiral not a general. As a SEAL, he is member of the US Navy, not US Army or US Marines.

For servicemen, ranks are important – they have worked hard and, in many cases, risked their lives, to earn them. And it’s one thing to omit a rank and another to botch the rank of the highest-ranking Special Forces operator in the country. (Read the rest here.)

Despite that error, Admiral McRaven is showing leadership, much as he so well managed the bin Laden raid, by telling his troops to “pipe down” and threatening legal action.

SUA is not sure of the scope, but the Pentagon is threatening legal action if secrets were revealed in the new book, but this may also be a veiled threat to others:

McRaven tells troops to pipe down

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.

By KIMBERLY DOZIER – AP Intelligence Writer – in the Seattle Times

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.

Admiral William McRaven

“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, but Pentagon spokesman George Little said Friday officials expect to receive a copy “very shortly.”

Little said the Pentagon will decide whether to take any action against the author once officials review the book’s contents to determine whether it includes classified information. He said the Department of Justice would have the lead role if any legal action were to be taken.

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.”

He acknowledged that former service members are “well within their rights to advocate for certain causes or write books about their adventures,” but he cautioned them against claiming to speak for all special operations troops and against endangering troops by what they write.

News broke Wednesday that one of the SEALs McRaven commanded on the bin Laden raid would be releasing his book, “No Easy Day,” on Sept. 11, with the author listed under the pseudonym of Mark Owen.

The author was identified Thursday by Fox News as Matt Bissonnette, who left the Navy last summer.

One current and one former U.S. military official confirmed the name, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss military personnel matters.

Penguin Group (USA)’s Dutton imprint, the publisher, asked news organizations Thursday to withhold his identity.

“Sharing the true story of his personal experience in `No Easy Day’ is a courageous act in the face of obvious risks to his personal security,” Dutton spokeswoman Christine Ball said in a statement. “That personal security is the sole reason the book is being published under a pseudonym.”

Bissonnette also changed the names of the other SEALs in the account, the publisher says.

Al-Qaida sympathizers posted photos of Bissonnette on jihadist web forums and called for his killing in retaliation for bin Laden’s death.

“First picture of one of the dogs who killed the martyr Sheik Osama bin Laden,” reads one posting, with a photo that has circulated in Western media said to be Bissonette, crouching with an automatic weapon. “We ask almighty God to destroy him sooner or later,” it reads.

The posting Friday was by a militant sympathizer who goes by the username “The Sniper of the Arabian Peninsula,” who often posts on such websites but whose identity is not known.

Efforts to locate Bissonnette for comment were unsuccessful.

McRaven’s plea for discretion comes as a number of special operators publish memoirs or appear in the media.

Best seller “American Sniper,” was published this year by former SEAL Chris Kyle, detailing his 150-plus kills of insurgents from 1999 to 2009.

Many of the special operations advocacy groups that are critical of Obama also openly identify members. One of the groups is run by retired Navy SEAL Ryan Zinke, who touts his time years ago at SEAL Team 6, the top secret unit that carried out the bin Laden raid.

Even Special Operations Command made an exception to its normal reticence with the media when it signed off on this year’s movie “Act of Valor,” which followed active duty SEALs carrying out training exercises that were turned into what looked like real action scenes for the film.

McRaven wrote that there was a difference between “Act of Valor”, which was approved by the command as a recruiting tool, and some of the other recent publications.

“There is, in my opinion, a distinct line between recounting a story for…education or entertainment and telling a story that exposes sensitive activities just to garner greater readership and personal profit,” he wrote.

The author of “No Easy Day” is slated to appear on the CBS News program “60 Minutes” on Sept. 9th.

Expecting a major best-seller, Dutton has already increased the initial print run of 300,000 copies to 400,000 copies. “No Easy Day” was No. 1 on Amazon.com as of late Friday morning, displacing the million-selling erotic trilogy “Fifty Shades of Gray.”

The publisher says the author will be donating the majority of the proceeds from the book to charities.


Associated Press National Security Writer Robert Burns contributed to this report. AP writer Hillel Italie contributed to this report from New York, and AP writer Lee Keath contributed to this report from Cairo.

The DNC and the Jumah – Catering to roots?

Editor’s Note – Is there really any doubt anymore? If this is how the DNC plans to open its convention, you can expect an explosion of “Islamic inclusion” in a the second term if Obama wins.

With the well-documented Islamist infiltration already underway in the White House and high offices in the administration, it is no surprise they chose this approach. Apparently, Obama’s Indonesian Islamic roots are manifest in all he does, coupled with his anti-colonialism and socialist/communist upbring so well demonstrated in the movie “2016”.

Below is a video of the characters who will be involved – listen to their words, and lies. To sum it up, here is a comment by a viewer by the moniker tthan43:

If the DNC hosting the muslim community and their radical islamist philosophies does not convince the people of this nation that we have a [M]uslim president, a foreigner and a fraud as president, nothing will.

Jihad at the DNC

by  – Front Page

It is no surprise, after four years of Obama Administration pandering, Muslim groups have a prominent role at the upcoming Democratic National Convention in Charlotte. The Charlotte Observer reports that organizers expect as many as 20,000 Muslims to attend the “Jumah at the DNC” series of events being organized by the Bureau of Indigenous Muslim Affairs (BIMA). Among these events is an all-day “Islamic Cultural & Fun Fest,” which will include a “TownHall Issues Conference” that will address “issues such as Islamaphobia, Anti-Shariah, Middle Eastern Crisis, Patriot Act, National Defense Authorization Act and more.”

There is no doubt whatsoever that this “TownHall Issues Conference” will not include any discussion of Islamic jihad terror plotting in the U.S., or of how Muslim groups have tried to exaggerate the problem of “Islamophobia” by faking hate crimes. It is likewise certain that the “Anti-Shariah” issue will be portrayed as an attempt by bigoted Americans to restrict Muslim religious freedom, when in reality it is solely an attempt to prevent the political and supremacist aspects of Islamic law that are at variance with constitutional freedoms from gaining a foothold here. Certain also is that the discussions of the Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Act will focus on how these measures are supposedly excessive and unfairly target Muslims.

The "Blind Sheik"

The overall thrust of the entire “TownHall Issues Conference,” as is clear from its stated agenda, is to portray Muslims as the innocent victims of a bigoted, racist and “Islamophobic” government and law enforcement establishment that is unfairly scapegoating Muslims as a whole for the misguided deeds of a few on September 11, 2001. It will include no discussion of the many attempted jihad attacks against the U.S. since then, or of the successful ones, such as Nidal Malik Hasan’s massacre at Fort Hood or Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad’s murders outside a military recruiting station in Little Rock, Arkansas. Any and all scrutiny of the Muslim community in the U.S. will be portrayed as gratuitous and unwarranted. The assembled Democrats, meanwhile, will be falling all over themselves to promise that whatever domestic counter-terror apparatus the Obama administration has failed to dismantle during its first term will go under the knife during its second.

But the most disturbing aspect of the entire “Jumah at the DNC” is not the obvious victimhood-mongering of its agenda, but the people involved. The Democrats are playing host to an unsavory gang of Islamic supremacists with numerous ties to jihad groups. Even this is not surprising, but it should be a matter of concern to any Americans who are more aware of the jihad threat than the average politically correct Democrat pol.

Take, for example, BIMA spokesman Jibril Hough. Hough’s mosque, the Islamic Center of Charlotte, is owned by a Muslim Brotherhood group, the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), which was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Hamas terror funding case. When confronted about this on a radio show, Hough first professed not to be aware of the charges against NAIT, and then refused to disavow the organization, saying only that he himself was “not necessarily” a member of NAIT and: “I was not involved in the decision to allow NAIT to be the [title] holder.”

Siraj Wahhaj

Meanwhile, the “Grand Imam” for Jumah at the DNC is none other than Siraj Wahhaj. Wahhaj is one of the most sought-after speakers on the Muslim circuit, and has addressed audiences all over the country; in 1991, he even became the first Muslim to give an invocation to the U.S. Congress. After 9/11, his renown as a moderate Muslim grew when he declared: “I now feel responsible to preach, actually to go on a jihad against extremism.” But as with so many other Muslim leaders in the U.S., Siraj Wahhaj is not as moderate as he may appear at first glance.

Wahhaj was several years ago designated a “potential unindicted co-conspirator” in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. He himself has denounced this designation as essentially meaningless, but he didn’t earn it by doing nothing. In the early 1990s he squired the Blind Sheikh, Omar Abdel Rahman, all around New York City and New Jersey, sponsoring talks by him in area mosques. The Blind Sheikh, of course, is now serving a life sentence for his role in the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993, as well as in jihad plots to blow up the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels.

When Wahhaj was traveling around with the Blind Sheikh, was Rahman “moderate,” and then became “radicalized”  later? Or did Rahman and Wahhaj share a supremacist and violent view of Islam, but Wahhaj is going about his jihad in a way that is less likely than Rahman’s to draw law enforcement scrutiny? No one ever asks Wahhaj such questions – least of all Democrat Party politicians.

Nor is Wahhaj’s association with the Blind Sheikh the only blot on his reputation as a “moderate.” He has warned that the United States will fall unless it “accepts the Islamic agenda.” He has also asserted that “if only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate.”

So why is such a man acting as the “Grand Imam” at “Jumah at the DNC”? The Democrats are so in thrall to multiculturalism that it is likely that few, if any, DNC organizers know or care about Wahhaj’s Islamic supremacist statements and ties. To raise any concerns about such a speaker would be “Islamophobic,” violating every rule of the anti-American, anti-Western ethos that prevails among so many Democrats today.

The worst thing about Siraj Wahhaj’s appearance at “Jumah at the DNC” is that it is so thoroughly unsurprising. What would be genuinely shocking would be if the DNC anywhere, at anytime, featured a speaker who spoke realistically about the jihad threat. But there is about as much chance of that as there is of the Democrats ditching Obama and nominating David Horowitz as their candidate for President of the United States.

Jumah At The DNC – watch for yourself:

"The Unvetted" – Must see video by special permission

Editor’s Note – Yet another Obama vetting movie is out, following “2016” and released at the same time as “The Hope And The Change” movie that chronicles Obama supporters who have lost the “hope”. Its called “The Unvetted”, and you can view it in its entirety here.

“2016” is a very real box office success and “The Hope and the Change” is also posted on our home page. Please spread the word so the electorate can finally understand who Obama really is, and vote accordingly.

With special permission from Mr. Kincaid – watch the video below, here at SUA:

New Film “The Unvetted” Exposes Obama’s Communist Cover-up

Right Side News

A new film from America’s Survival, Inc. documents what journalist Cliff Kincaid calls “one of the most extraordinary cover-ups in American history –how a presidential candidate with a covert connection to a major Communist Party operative was protected by the major liberal and conservative media.”

Kincaid is the president of America’s Survival, Inc. (ASI) and recently held a Washington, D.C. conference on “The Vetting” of Barack Obama. The 30 minute film The Unvetted is available for viewing for free at the ASI YouTube channel.

“Four years after we broke the story wide open with the release of a 600-page FBI file on Barack Obama’s communist mentor, we are still finding major elements of the media with their heads in the sand,” Kincaid said, in announcing the official release of the new film. Kincaid is a veteran Washington journalist with more than 30 years of experience.

The film is produced in cooperation with AB INDEPENDENT PRODUCTIONS, headed by Agustin Blazquez, producer/director of many documentaries, including “Che: The Other Side of an Icon.” The “Che” documentary, which told the truth about Castro’s communist revolution, was rejected for funding and airing by public television.

Watch the video here:

Working with blogger Trevor Loudon, Kincaid describes in the film how they uncovered the fact that Obama had concealed the identity of Frank Marshall Davis in his memoir Dreams from My Father, calling him just “Frank” and depicting him as a poet and writer.

“Obama knew that Frank Marshall Davis was an associate and mentor and that he had to protect his communist identity from public scrutiny,” Kincaid points out.

The film includes an interview with Kincaid and some of the original source material used to document Obama’s relationship with Davis.

“We expected silence and ridicule from the liberal media when we exposed Obama’s ‘Frank’ as Communist Frank Marshall Davis,” Kincaid said. “But the Drudge Report would not run my ads on Frank Marshall Davis during the fall of 2008. Fox News did not cover our news conference in May of 2008 revealing the communist identity of ‘Frank’ from Obama’s book.”

Kincaid went on, “The conservative media must stop protecting Obama from the scrutiny he deserves. Our film ‘The Unvetted’ explains this scandal and cover-up. Our sincere thanks to Right Side News for telling the story that has to be told. Right Side News is a news source that you can trust. They deserve your support as we go forward exposing this most deadly and dangerous of cover-ups.”

Videos and documents from Kincaid’s conference on “The Vetting” of Obama can be found at the website www.LeninandSharia.com The conference featured speeches by, among others, Trevor Loudon; filmmaker Joel Gilbert, director of a new film on the possibility that Davis was Obama’s real father; Paul Kengor, author of a new book on Davis entitled The Communist; and former KGB officer Konstantin Preobrazhensky, who gave a report on Soviet/Russian cooperation with Arab and Islamic terrorist groups and states.

Politics trumps national security – Dempsey play politics

Editor’s Note – Too often these days, the Pentagon acts more like a political arm of the administration than the warriors they are supposed to be. As the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Dempsey has far more to deal with in his own duties than to make political statements to support his boss.

Former Defense Secretary Gates seems to have more of an idea than Dempsey on the importance of doing your job, and not leaking information:

Robert Gates, the former defense secretary, reportedly blasted the national security team in the Obama White House for blabbing about the raid to kill Osama bin Laden. “Shut the f— up,” Gates told Tom Donilon, who is now Obama’s national security adviser, according to a book by New York Times reporter David Sanger.

Shouldn’t Dempsey being giving the same advice? Shouldn’t he be defending those who have already made the sacrifice – in support of those now doing the same?

Who has more standing in these manners? Tom Donilon, or the OPSEC Education Project? Donilon is completely unqualified, incompetent, and naive – and Dempsey has lost focus at a minimum. Remember your oath General, Obama and team have certainly forgotten theirs.

Politics trumps national security?

General Dempsey Forgets Oath, Plays Politics

by LAWRENCE SELLIN, PHD – Family Security Matters

Has General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, made himself a political shill for the Obama Administration?

According to Fox News, General Dempsey criticized a group of former military and intelligence operatives for its aggressive campaign against President Obama, telling Fox News that he is “disappointed” by such political activity, which he called “not useful.”

General Martin Dempsey (R) listens while US President Barack Obama. Politics trumps national security? AFP PHOTO/Brendan SMIALOWSKI

Specifically, Dempsey denounced a group of former CIA agents, Navy SEALs and other military members, the Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund, who recently released a long-form political ad blasting Obama for security leaks on his watch, as well as suggesting he has taken too much credit for the SEALs raid in Pakistan that killed Usama bin Laden.

Those seem to be legitimate criticisms made by knowledgeable and experienced individuals.

Dempsey, however, said as the steward of his profession — the military — he thinks it imperative that the military remain “apolitical.”

Nonsense. They are civilians.

This is nothing less than a blatant attempt by Dempsey to silence criticism of Obama because it makes him look bad to the Administration that appointed him.

One imagines the Obama campaign dressing down Dempsey: “Can’t you do something to control your people?”

Like myself, members of the Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund are now private citizens, whose freedom of speech is protected by the Constitution, the founding document Dempsey took an oath to “support and defend.”

The Obama Administration filed a lawsuit in Ohio that would diminish the rights of military voters.

Perhaps General Dempsey would also prefer that present and former members of the military not be permitted to vote because that would be making a political statement.

It is important to note, however, that military officers become generals largely because of their political savvy and their ability to “work the system.” Dempsey can be forgiven for protecting his position in the halls of power, carefully navigating past and present political minefields.

To use Obama’s own dismissive comments regarding the criticisms made by the Special Operations OPSEC Education Fund, Dempsey’s words should not be taken too seriously; “this kind of stuff springs up before election time.”

Instead of dabbling in election year politics, the nation would be better served if Dempsey took his own advice and remained “apolitical” focusing his attention on issues affecting the health and effectiveness of the military, not protecting the flank of the Obama Administration.

I remind General Dempsey that thirty-eight soldiers killed themselves in July, the worst month for suicides since the Army began releasing figures in 2009.

Lawrence Sellin, Phd

If soldiers continue to take their lives at the current rate, the Army will lose about 200 active-duty troops this year, a number that is significantly higher than any year in the past decade.

Attend to your duties, sir. Curtailing free speech by civilians is not one of them.


About the author:

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is a retired colonel with 29 years of service in the US Army Reserve and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Colonel Sellin is the author of “Afghanistan and the Culture of Military Leadership” and “Political Establishments and the Culture of Dependency”. He receives email at lawrence.sellin@gmail.com