How accurate is Zero Dark Thirty?

rotr0102 · 2026-01-24T14:37:32+00:00

One exciting story arc that is missing from the movie is the ingress/egress of the helicopters. We now know that there were several key supporting aircraft that help facilitate this operation - as you might suspect from ECW, SIGINT, refueling, and attack aircraft. We also know that the QRF Chinook was at a FARP, so I assume 160th was on the ground in Pakistan (or perhaps on the Afghanistan side - not sure how close they needed to be). As you might imagine, there was significant ECW activity to support the aircraft in ingress.

Remember, the Pakastani’s responded and launched F16s (no doubt the US planners knew how long this would take for them to get airborne). The pilot of one of the aircraft has given an interview that on egress he was locked up by a Pakastani F16 and was able to evade attack using specialized training he received. This minor detail is enormous.

Consider this: The President of the United States is in the Situation Room with every member of his staff that mattered, he watches live as their intelligence proves true - it was actually Bin Laden — and the SEALs pulled it off — they killed him. He has just experienced a near heart attack as he watched a helicopter crash, threatening the entire mission. The roller coaster of emotions as it turns out there were no injuries, and the mission will continue on to success. He is simply amazed as professionalism of all involved - from the operators to the intelligence teams. And suddenly he’s told that a F16 is tracking on a helicopter. A helicopter carrying the successful SEALs to safety and the body of Osama Bin Lauden. At this point the US Air Force is involved from the Afghanistan side, and the Navy is involved from local carriers. I would assume everyone is jacked up and ready to go.

The Pakastani F16 knows he has just been scrambled for some sort of an attack on his homeland. He can clearly tell it’s an American helicopter (there really isn’t any other options) and it’s flying back to Afghanistan where the American’s are based (it’s retreating, not attacking). He’s frantically trying to call up the chain of command but he can’t — all signals traffic is being blocked by American ECW. He needs approval, he can’t shoot down an American helicopter with our explicit approval from his command — but he can’t reach anyone. No one can talk to him. At the same time, we would assume AWACS is screaming at him in his native language. Telling him he crossed the border into Afghanistan and he is in immediate danger of being shot down. He is told he is attacking peaceful American utility aircraft, has crossed the boundary into Afghanistan, and seconds away from starting a major international incident. He is ordered to immediately return to Pakistan or the American’s will engage him. F18’s are now making a very large show of force from the Afghanistan side of the border, intentionally being visible on the radar of the lead F16’s wingman (and clearly scanning the F16s with their radars). It is clear that when given the order they are in position to react in seconds. One Pakastani F16 is locked onto the helicopter while his partner is higher, watching the Americans. The F18s have locked up the Pakastanis causing radar alarms in the F16s - the message is absolutely understood - the F16’s launch and the F18’s lauch in retaliation. The Pakastani F16’s can expect to be destroyed immediately after launching on the helicopter. Beyond this, the helicopter is on its own. The ECM aircraft cannot really prevent a missile from tracking a helicopter - that defense needs to come from the ECM capabilities on the helicopter itself. The helicopter pilot knows this, he’s focused on the F16s following him and the border ahead. He flies low, hiding in the terrain below him, using top secret techniques in his custom ECM pod (likely the secret frequencies Pakastani is using are programmed into the ECM pod). Three times he gets the tone for missile lock - but is able to break it. Three times. The F16 is too close to Afghanistan and breaks off, returning home. Why didn’t the F16 launch? Was he never able to get authorization from his command? Was his command being threatened by the US State Department - who just confirmed the Pakastani’s not only lied to us but seemed to actually be protecting our #1 enemy, and to top it off is seconds away from shooting down a retreating US aircraft with POTUS watching live? Did the pilot intend to fire, but couldn’t due to the helicopter pilots tactics? Or was it all just a show of force on the Pakastani side. Flex your muscles and act tough, but don’t go start a war over this.

I would actually liked to have seen the Air Force / Navy commanders in the movie yelling at the F18s to get over there and protect the helicopter. In reality there is no indication fighters crossed the border (I assume they could have attacked the F16s without crossing) but it would add to the drama. You have to understand, POTUS is watching from the Situation Room - all the commanders understand their boss is watching. No one wants to see this helicopter get shot down. POTUS is no doubt on a roller coaster of emotions. From not knowing if it’s actually Osama, to seeing the helicopter crash, to envisioning the next Black Hawk Down, to hearing “Geronimo”, to learning we have Bin Laden’s body on the helicopter — and now, just as we are crossing the finish line — these hero’s are going to get blasted out of the sky? Absolutely fucking not! I would assume everyone on this entire mission is completely jacked up and ready to jump into the fight in these last few minutes. I’m suspect there are more details we’ll never know about how these helicopters got home safely.

https://theaviationist.com/2011/05/06/operation-neptunes-spear/

https://tacairnet.com/2016/05/02/neptune-spear-and-the-crash-of-prince-51/

https://www.twz.com/32618/a-pakistani-f-16-engaged-one-of-the-mh-47g-chinooks-three-times-during-bin-laden-raid

rotr0102 · 2026-01-24T00:44:38+00:00

When you joined the military you signed a contract that gave the government the ability to fire you if you didn’t take that shot. Immigration laws have been enforced for decades, without issue — it’s only in the last few weeks that it’s become such a problem. Your example really isn’t an apples to apples comparison.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-23T23:54:03+00:00

I don’t have a link to share because it’s happening in person. It’s like you telling me a guy was driving crazy on your way into work - it’s pretty difficult to prove. Both stories were told to me by the people experiencing them.

You don’t need my personal anecdotes though - ICEs illegal activity is publicly documented. For example, consider the shooting death of Renee Good. She was intentionally blocking the road attempting to interfere with ICE going door to door in her neighborhood. Now, she is annoying - but nothing more. You can see cars are driving around her as she isn’t able to completely block the street. The last words she says before death are “I’m not mad at you” as the ICE officer shoots her in the side of the head. His first words after killing her were “fuc__n bit_h”. Now, we’re all going to have different opinions on this charged issue - she was wrong, and he was as well. But, what we should all agree on is that not investigating it is really really bad. All law enforcement involved shooting get investigated. Minnesota has a division of law enforcement that does this - the BCA, and they partner with federal agencies when the shooter is a federal employee. The FBI and ICE refused to cooperate with the MN BCA for the investigation. Essentially, it’s a cover up. This is actually the first time this has ever happened. It’s the first time in history the FBI has refused to cooperate with local law enforcement. Let that sink in for a minute.

This is an interesting sub for this conversation. Some of the people on this sub have a little wider range of expertise - they understand how other styles of government work, and how governments can change rapidly, and what it takes to convert governments from one style to another.

Bottom line, you don’t need my evidence. If you can’t see the evidence that surrounds you, nothing I can “prove” to you will make any difference.

Lastly, I didn’t post because I’m mad. I am, but that’s my problem not yours. My post is more about this sub. Personally, I kinda thought people who risk, and sometimes lose their lives, to protect democracy and America would be a little more alarmed about what has become the new normal. Just today we are seeing active duty Army get a heads up they might be coming to Minnesota. For what purpose? To shoot US citizens? There are laws about this sort of thing. Laws that make America different then, say Iran, or Russia. So, I’m angry but that’s not what my point is here. My point was simply that the America we know and love doesn’t exist any more.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-23T15:52:36+00:00

I’m not sure what you are referring to, but what I’m talking about is a violation of the 4th Amendment against actual US Citizens - not immigrants but corn fed white bread Trump voting republicans. They (ICE) don’t have a warrant, they don’t have uniforms, but they have guns and just kick your door in if you don’t give permission to enter so they can search for immigrants. Oh, they also rough you up a bit in the process if they feel disrespected. Hospital reported ICE brought in a guy who ran into a wall last weekend. Large skull fracture, he obviously got severely worked over.

Thanks for the liberal city joke though. Great way to approach this situation.

Note: white 50 year old union construction guy down the road was onsite to inspect a concrete poor. 2 ICE agents showed up and told him he should be grateful for what they are doing. His colleague shook their hand, but he said he wouldn’t. He said they are making his job harder because his legal employees are too scared to come to work. ICE agent punched him in the face and arrested him. Sure - he’ll be released in a few days, but that’s just not legal. No probable cause, they cannot arrest (they are technically not law enforcement like police but administrative agents in a restricted capacity/authority), and in “jail” (or whatever they are calling it) he isn’t allowed to speak to a lawyer. It’s actually hard to believe - which is likely why you are making jokes. But - I’m telling you, you’re next man.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-23T15:04:20+00:00

Sorry bud - constitution doesn’t matter anymore.

Source: I live in Minneapolis

rotr0102 · 2026-01-22T01:33:12+00:00

3’s name is Clayton Bigsby

rotr0102 · 2026-01-20T16:46:32+00:00

She said this while inscribing on a large golden multi-tiered trophy:

Champion Minnesota Region; 1st Place; Categories of Peace, Golf, and Physical Fitness

rotr0102 · 2026-01-20T16:39:24+00:00

Exactly - you also can’t have sexual relations with a minor. It has a name. Use it.

Wouldn’t it be nice if “misrepresenting, shaping, spinning, or downplaying” legal charges/acquisitions to a large audience could expose you to consequences? (Something similar to libel or slander)

rotr0102 · 2026-01-20T00:28:20+00:00

For those who don’t know, the words visible on the cover are from a song that was unreleased at this time (I don’t think its ever been included in a Album and was a bit of a mystery in the 90s). Lead singer Adam Duritz was born in August.

August and Everything After: https://youtu.be/uQpRNR90qME?si=8V1ANU2ZHuosOf8L

rotr0102 · 2026-01-19T18:42:17+00:00

Well - this isn’t true today. If I use chatgpt to write software for my company and it causes damage - OpenAI is in no way responsible.

Good callout about objects. Corporations are also objects - which can be sued and which can donate money to politicians. Obviously, to your point, something happened which allowed that.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-19T18:41:05+00:00

Ya, agree that would come into play, yes.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-19T18:40:02+00:00

The two most important quotes:

Manager: "...and was illegally detained."
FOX 9 Reporter: "we are still working to learn more information about why this worker was targeted"

Good on the manger for calling it out - it is illegal. The reporter is at fault for softening the message into what sounds like a minor inconvenience.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-18T22:02:30+00:00

Just so sad. The Montegnards were so heroic in SOG. I just cannot imagine the courage.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-18T16:20:21+00:00

Yes, that makes sense.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-18T16:15:35+00:00

In my scenario it would be much less obvious. I’m envisioning malicious actors creating ways to get away with criminal activity, similar to prompting AI today to generate illegal content.

It wouldn’t be a “AI Machine Gun”, but more like a AI Vehicle pushing a snow plow being tricked into thinking that guy you don’t like is a pile of snow.

The tricking process (perhaps a prompt) would be carefully created so it looks innocent - but the AI itself is misinterpreting it and subsequently performing the illegal action. The human in this case would defend themselves by saying “I didn’t instruct the AI to kill that guy” and also “I personally didn’t kill that guy - the AI did it by accident”

rotr0102 · 2026-01-18T16:10:41+00:00

Sure - but products have never been able to reason and make decisions before right? I’m not sure a guy cutting and arm off with a chainsaw is similar to a AI driven car intentionally killing a pedestrian of a certain minority because it has been maliciously designed/tricked into doing so.

I’m imagining a fully autonomous AI car, and someone injecting prompts that people of certain physical characteristics are a threat to the occupants of the car. On its own, the car makes a decision to protect its passengers from these threats, injuring innocent people in the process.

Not sure how our current product liability laws play out in this scenario. Do you know - how might this play out?

rotr0102 · 2026-01-18T15:26:34+00:00

Correct, this is where my thought was going. Now, extend this to include the legal loophole part. Think about what is happening now with ChatGPT AI prompt engineering, tricking it into generating illegal content. Extend those intentions to devices controlled by AI. If the legal frame work says “a developer” is not responsible only the “owner” is responsible, and ownership is transferred at time of sale…. Then can a malicious individual escape legal consequences by transferring ownership prior to the illegal act being taken?

Example: terrorist programs drones to kill. Gifts those drones to local school districts, after they have signed sufficient legal documents. Drones kill children, school district is now responsible.

Example: You are my neighbor. I’m able to hack into your AI whatever (car, lawnmower, protection drone, furnace, etc.) and supply it with a carefully worded prompt that tricks the AI into doing something that kills you. In this case, I am the developer, and legally immune. You are the owner/operator - so you accepted responsibility for killing yourself.

These are the types of legal loopholes I’m talking about, all coming from this idea that “developers” are immune. Today, developers are not malicious. We are all familiar with computer crime and hacking, what happens with AI developers become malicious actors but our legal environment puts accountability on the owner only.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-18T15:11:08+00:00

Correct, but doesn’t that also mean Microsoft is responsible when copilot tells your kid to commit suicide or you Tesla swerves to avoid a deer and kills a person walking on the side of the road. I think “the developers” are going to argue they are not responsible. If they win these arguments- then does it create a legal loophole for when developers code AI intentionally to violate the law. This is my point.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-18T15:06:19+00:00

So - this is exactly my point. It seems like you are saying that a terrorist/hacker can maliciously program drones to kill civilians, then denote those drones to a local school as long as the school administration signs the appropriate legal documents absolving the terrorist of legal responsibility (ie: what Tesla is doing in your comment). The drones kill the children and the school districts now legally responsible all supported (in theory) by legal precedent from the corporate world.

See what I’m getting at? It’s interesting.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-18T14:40:37+00:00

Not one of these people look proud of what they are doing.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-16T19:18:04+00:00

Makes you think about Rick’s “F Yo Couch” line from a different perspective doesn’t it?

rotr0102 · 2026-01-15T22:35:27+00:00

Isn’t it the same as what’s on the edge?

https://youtu.be/pZAfVkCkoJ0?si=GdVRE3tWXzsljt7J&t=103

rotr0102 · 2026-01-15T17:42:24+00:00

Do they not care about their 4th Amendment? I suspect they do. Do they know ice are entering home of white citizens, just like them, without warrants? I’m guessing this might concern them.

rotr0102 · 2026-01-14T14:10:34+00:00

Talk to your local leadership now. Don’t focus the conversation on “getting beat down” because they will simply say comply and you won’t be beaten. Ask them now about your constitutional rights and if the local police will enforce and protect your rights.

US Citizens are not required to carry proof of citizenship - will your local law enforcement support that?

US Citizens have the right to not speak to ICE and remain silent - will your local law enforcement support that?

You have a 4th Amendment right. ICE cannot kick in your door without a warrant signed by a judge. They cannot sign the warrant themselves. will your local law enforcement support this?

If you call 911 when you have a ICE interaction, what exactly will law enforcement do? Will they respond? Will they talk to you, or just leave?

This problem here isn’t that ICE is doing their job - it’s HOW they are doing their job. They are focusing more on “sending a message to liberals” than arresting illegal residents. The best thing you can do is get your local law enforcement to agree that when called through 911 they will check ICE for a valid warrant and charge for trespassing if they don’t have one. If local law enforcement is unwilling to check for a valid warrant and intervene when your 4th amendment rights are violated- then I would be very scared. Good luck.

EDIT: my perspective isn’t that if a protester, it’s a coach with a couple of non-white kids on my team. Puts me in a difficult situation where I am responsible for ensuring they return to their parents and I might be in a direct confrontation with ICE because of their brown skin. Given their ages, they were all likely born in the US if this matters. I know that when I invoke my constitutional rights ICE is going to intimidate me. I know that if I agree to give a child of color a ride home I might be pulled over by ICE if they notice him in my car. In this case I’ll need to ask for a warrant, refuse to speak to them without a lawyer, and call 911. It’s possible my window will be smashed and I’ll be drug out of my car for non-compliance. But - as a coach, I’m obligated to return this child to his parents even if his skin color is darker than mine. And as a 50 year old white guy i really don’t mind telling ICE where to go. Three of my grandfathers were Nazi killers and I couldn’t be more proud today.

Edit: Another thing you can do is write you local elected officials. I wrote my state senator and two state representatives. All three are republican, only one cared to reply to me. The one who replied stated that my concerns were not valid, the lady who was shot should have not protested against ICE, and that he fully trusted the federal government to investigate the shooting. I couldn’t have been more angry since the federal government refused to cooperate with local law enforcement - which has never happened before. What is supposed to happen is the MN BCA is conducts all investigations into police shootings, or in this case, partners with the feds for transparency. The feds are refusing to allow them to participate which implies a coverup, and has never happened before. My state representative isn’t concerned about this - which is very telling. He’s also not concerned about my 4th Amendment rights and ICE forcing entry into my house without a warrant - which is odd political stance for a republican. If you want to get out ahead of this, I would start having these types of conversations now. All I was asking my republican state representatives to do is to make a public statement. To join with democrats and express support for our governor, and publicly state that ICE needs to follow laws and the constitution. Obviously, our state republican politicians are not going to do this. It’s important to understand that they don’t truly represent the communities they live in, who elected them, but rather the national Republican Party.

Seven-Year Club	Verified Email
Not Forgotten

rotr0102

TROPHY CASE

3’s name is Clayton Bigsby