pornography. this in the hideaway of a self-described religious warrior who says the united states and the west are immoral and godless. let's assess the importance of these new revelations with michael shoier, and with our national homeland security adviser, fran townsend. michael, let me start, i guess it's no surprise that the leader of al qaeda would want the president of the united states dead. but it's startling and jolting a bit to hear what written communications, plural, in which bin laden discusses his desire to have the president of the united states assassinated? >> i don't think it's surprising. and i think it's probably even worse now. they'll be looking to exact an eye for an eye. i suspect the secret service is very much en garde, because obama put himself in the bull's-eye. >> is assassination in the playbook? >> bin laden was very much involved in the early '90s in yemen in arranging the assassination of socialists and marxist yemeni politician. so it's not outside the playbook. >> remember the pashtun leader up in the north who was assassinated on september 10th. this was clearly an al qaeda -- he was an enemy of bin laden's, so they'll use it when it's convenient for them and it achieves their goals. >> when you were in the bush white house, was there intelligence suggesting not only they were trying to attack new york, trying to attack washington, but they wanted to assassinate the president of the united states? >> you know, john, we would get intelligence that there were assassination -- threats would be too strong, but there was intelligence that there was desire. >> clinton in the philippines. so as fran says, it's very usual. >> and pornography. pornography. now. number one, does it surprise you that bin laden would have pornography? someone who said he was a warrior in the name, he distorted islam, but said he was a warrior in the name of god. >> i'm not sure how distorted islam he is. i think there's very much to say that he was well within the parameters of islam. what i've read is the pornography is tapes and electronic things. and of course, terrorists, gangsters, drug traffickers use videotapes to embed information to move without people seeing it. islamic terrorists have very often used pornography for that. now, i don't know what this is for, but it's interesting that it is videotapes. >> so you're suggesting perhaps not for viewing, but for somehow using to hide something? >> john, it could be both, i could be entirely wrong, but the idea that there's pornography there in the form of a videotape is not inconsistent with the means they use to hide communications. >> and also, john, during the war in afghanistan, and we'd conduct -- the u.s. would conduct raids against al qaeda or taliban targets, and it was not unusual to find electronic media, pornography, in those raids. so i was not surprised. i mean, it's all part of just how hypocritical -- here's this guy who claims to be a religious warrior. he's got three wives practically imprisoned in his compound and he's watching dirty movies. >> i'm going to play devil's advocate, because there will be some how there who say, and they will be critical of me for even playing devil's advocate, that this could somehow be part of u.s. disinformation. that they're trying to smear bin laden and would say this even though it's not true? >> no, there are legal restrictions on what information the united states can officially put out. what you've got to look for now is whether or not the u.s. government confirms or denies the existence of these tapes. >> this administration is out of control in terms of leaking things. they're endangering sailors, they're endangering cia officers, but that's generally acceptable in america. i don't know what to believe or not to believe by these characters at the moment. >> i want to come back to that in a moment. but i want to focus again on one of the other new revelations we're learning about today, which is that bin laden recorded a message, trying to somehow attach himself or speak in favor of the arab spring, which many would say is just antithetical to everything he stood for. particularly about tunisia and egypt, not about libya where he has grievances, not about the area at large. why? >> anything that moves to the dictators is in favor -- >> even if they're moving towards democracy? >> they're not moving towards democracy. the media has presented that and mr. obama and his dreamers has presented that, but at the end of the day, 80 million egyptians, for example, are not going to move toward a secular democracy they regard as pagan and away from islam. it's just a nonsense. so supporting the overthrow of dictators, that's been one of their goals since the beginning. >> i have a different view of this, john. i actually think that bin laden saw this democratic movement throughout the middle east as leaving him behind, because it is antithetical. if people were going to embrace these freedoms, they were going to reject bin laden's entire philosophy. and unless he found some piece of this to hold on to, he ran the risk of losing people. so i have a somewhat different view. >> i want to ask you a question, u.s. intelligence had access to the wives. sources tell us it was a hostile encounter. what would the process be, as someone who's worked in the cia? if you were going into that meeting, that interrogation, that debriefing, call it what you will, what's the process? >> well, i think the process would be very formal in the case of women. you'd be very courteous to them. they were with the pakistanis for a long time, so the pakistanis probably primed them for the interview and what not to say. and i don't know if there's any reason to believe they didn't love their husband and probably are not especially happy that we shot him down. >> normally, under most circumstances, you would separate the wives. you would want to interview them individually. you wouldn't want to have the pakistani service present with you. you'd ideally like to have a native-speaking woman do the questioning. we didn't get that luxury. so this was not horribly productive, but my understanding is, we're in the early going. and u.s. and pakistani officials can work again. >> you made a point, michael, a moment ago, about leaks, and you believe the leaks are endangering the lives of people. i want you to listen. we started this conversation last night. it's been an issue, of course, for the last 10, 11 days. but the defense secretary, robert gates, who happens to be a former cia director, during a conversation with marines at camp lejeune, north carolina, last night made clear that he's not happy about all the talking. listen. >> frankly, a week ago sunday in the situation room, we all agreed that we would not release any operational details from the effort to take out bin laden. that all fell apart on monday, the next day. >> now, who's that message directed at? >> oh, i think the white house and john brennan. the administration yesterday tried to put it on to the newsroom or the news people at the white house, and of course, that level of information is only going to be given to the news people if it's approved by the president and his terrorism advisers. so that's where it's coming from. >> where'd they cross the line, in your view? where did they go from information that needs to be put out -- bin laden is dead, here's the raid, here's how it went down, to the specificity of a level of -- >> no one needed to know about the stealth helicopters. certainly no one needed to know about the cia observation post in abbottabad. we have described in detail all of the communication systems that bin laden was using to communicate with his organization. we've compromised those. al qaeda was already going to change them, but now they can be sure they know which ones they need to change. the one thing we haven't seen is any leaking about monetary, about financial raising. which suggests to me that they either didn't find any, or they found out all their good buddies on the arab peninsula have been funding osama bin laden and al qaeda. >> and they don't want to release that. do you agree with that? >> well, look, i do think that john brennan and the white house briefing room, when he did the brief, he actually said he was not going to give out a lot more of the details. having been there, john, there is a need to give some information out. i mean, what happens after that is this deluge. of course, every bureaucrat in washington who has any access thinks this is the opportunity to show they're in the know. >> and put people's lives at risk in doing that? >> i think there's too much information out there. the stealth helicopter, that wasn't the white house, that was left behind. you couldn't have helped that. the observation post, very dangerous for that to be out there. those sort of tactics. the seizure, you were going to get out there there was a seizure and what it was. it's unfortunate, but i don't worry as much about that as i do the observation post. >> thanks for coming in. we'll keep in touch we're also learning much more about the daring raid that led to bin laden's death. chris lawrence live at the pentagon with more on that. >> we're learning from a senior military official that all of the s.e.a.l.s carried with them special military cams that recorded just about every minute of this assault, from the time they hit the ground to the time they came out of there with osama bin laden's body. now, we're told that the video is hazy, that it was so dark, it's hard to make out certain things, and perhaps most telling, because the cameras are mounting on the s.e.a.l.s' helmets, their heads are constant moving. they're searching rooms, they're looking around doorways. so the video is very jerky. it's nothing like a movie, but it still could provide some real information about what exactly happened as they started to move those rooms. and more specifically, it provides the s.e.a.l.s a chance to relive and to see exactly what they were seeing in the heat of the moment. john? >> and chris, you were listing moments ago, we're having the conversation here, the defense secretary, of course, works in the building where you are, robert gates last night bemoaning, i'll use a gentle term, the lack of confidentiality in the united states government. you heard the conversation here about whether that engages -- what is the sense there at the pentagon? >> well, the sense i'm getting here is two things. one, that this is going to be a huge file-sharing exercise. in other words, a lot of people under the counterterrorism umbrella are going to have access to what's been taken out of bin laden's compound. combine that with the fact that this intelligence may spur some very quick missions in terms of acting on some of the intelligence against other targets, and there's a worry that some of the tactics and techniques that were used in this raid may now be compromised by the fact that so much information about it was released. so if they have to act in a very quick way, how much of their tactics and methods will they have to, you know, sort of change or update on the fly, because they may now be worried that some of those tactics may be compromised? >> important points from chris lawrence, live for us tonight at the pentagon. thanks, chris. ahead tonight, ron paul joins the 2012 republican presidential field and tells us how he would handle current crisis different than president obama. also ahead, a deadly explosion in pakistan and the taliban there says it's retaliation for the death of bin laden. the 3.6-liter pentastar v6 engine in the jeep grand cherokee has a best in class driving range of more than 500 miles per tank. which means you don't have to worry about finding a gas station. which is good... because there just might not be one. ♪ when it's planes in the sky ♪ ♪ for a chain of supply, that's logistics ♪ ♪ when the parts for the line ♪ ♪ come precisely on time ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ a continuous link, that is always in sync ♪ ♪ that's logistics ♪ ♪ there will be no more stress ♪ ♪ cause you've called ups, that's logistics ♪ you want to keep your loved ones safe and secure. give them the gift of financial security from new york life. we've been protecting families for over 166 years. new york life. the company you keep. deadly violence in pakistan today. a suicide attack leaves at least 80 people dead. and in claiming responsibility, the pakistani taliban calls the attack retaliation for the american raid that led to bin laden's death. reza sayah is live for us in islamabad. does the pakistani government view that has a singular message from the taliban, or do they believe there'll be more attacks? >> reporter: they believe there will be more attacks and the pakistani taliban says there will be more tobaccoattacks. this was a coordinated attack designed to kill a lot of people, and it did just that. 80 people killed, the deadliest attack this year. twin suicide attacks targeting hundreds of military recruits that hd just finished an extended training program. apparently, the night before, they were celebrating. morning came, they came out of this the training facility, ready to board vans to go home. that's when a suicide attacker walked up to the scene, blew himself up. there was chaos, commotion, people came to help, and that's when another suicide attacker came on the scene, this time on a motorcycle, detonated his bomb. no surprise the aftermath of the scene was an awful one. body parts and debris strewn everywhere. like we mentioned before, the pakistani taliban say they were responsible, john. >> and the pakistani taliban, reza, for our viewers who may not follow this so closely, they have a relationship, a friendship, if you will, an affiliation with al qaeda, but the pakistani taliban themselves not viewed as an organization that can project force out of pakistan, maybe just over the border, but not globally. any sense of al qaeda involved here, or just pakistani taliban? >> reporter: this is the pakistani taliban, who say that they're inspirational leader has always been osama bin laden. they say this attack was payback for his death 11 days ago. so no indication that al qaeda-linked groups, al qaeda affiliates were responsible. the pakistani taliban say it was them who did it. >> and they passed a resolution that condemns the u.s. raid and calls on a reassessment of u.s./pakistan relationships. is this a political statement, sort of a pushback, or is there a chance that this would actually go further to a break in relations? >> yeah, i think it's definitely a political statement. these are some tough words in this resolution, and i think the obama administration was eager for this pakistani government to take this bin laden episode, the fact that he was hiding here for all these years and acknowledge that they have a problem and perhaps go in a new direction, perhaps draft a new policy on extremism. but when you see tough rhetoric like this, this type of pointed resolution targeting the u.s., condemning what they call a violation of sovereignsy with this raid on the bin laden compound, it shows, it signals that they're now prepared to go in a new direction. at the same time, despite the tough talk from pakistan, there is no indication that this partnership with washington is going to fall apart. i think both sides know that they desperately need one another, so indications are the most likely scenario is that these two partners are going to move forward pointing fingers at one another, plotting through a very uncertain volatile relationship. >> reza sayah, live for us tonight in islamabad, thanks. let's get some important perspective now from congressman peter king of new york. the republican who's the chairman of the house homeland security committee, and a member of the house select committee on intelligence. congressman, i want to start with this deadly bombing in pakistan today. any doubt in your mind or from the intelligence you have been briefed on that this was a retaliation for the raid that killed bin laden? >> from all that i know and from all we've learned, this clearly was an attack by al qaeda and done, again, in revenge or in retaliation for bin laden. that's clearly what i've been led to believe, yeah. >> and when you talk to folks at the cia, when you do your own reporting, if you will, what is your sense right now of what has happened in the relationship with pakistan, and whether pakistan essentially gets the problem and is willing to make amends and work things out, or whether there's more of a defiant pullback saying, no, we're not the problem? >> i don't know if pakistan does get the message. i met last week with the chief of station in the pakistan gassy, and it was almost as if we were in two different universes. not realizing just how serious this is being taken by americans, not just the american people, but very high-ranking people in the administration, people in the congress, people who want to maintain a relationship with pakistan, but realize we are definitely at a cross roads right now. and i just don't know whether the pakistanis, whether it's president zardari, whether they realize the full impact of what it meant to have bin laden living in the shadow of some many government officials all these years. i don't know if they realize that very few people believe that pakistan was not aware of that, or if they were -- or if they were not, you know, they were just totally incompetent and inept. >> you've been receiving frequent updates, briefings on the intelligence received. one of the things cnn is told, the word "hostile" was used by sources to describe to us the mood, the tone of the wives of bin laden when they were questioned by u.s. intelligence officials. what do you know about that? >> that's basically what i've heard. i've not really heard any details other than that, other than the fact that i know the united states would have preferred to have separate interviews with the three. my understanding was, it was done combined, which really minimizes the impact of the interrogation. >> that 11 days now, essentially, 12 days since the death of bin laden, which means 11 or 12 days given the transport issues to start analyzing this treasure-trove of information, the thumb drives, the hand-written notes from bin laden's personal journal. what's your sense of any threats to the american people that have not been discussed in recent days. anything you're particularly worried about? >> no, there's nothing that i'm aware of that's come out particularly. there's been some general talk, you know, we saw the one last week about tacks on mass transit. there's others as far as like various industries, but nothing specific. nothing we really didn't know before. if anything, it's just reinforced concerns we did have before, but really nothing new. but, again, i think we are into instant gratification at this country. i know that cia look very quickly to see if they can find any targets, any sites, any plans operations. and so far, none of that has been found. i think the real wealth of this information will be coming out over the next weeks and months. because very seldom you find a silver bullet that explains everything or says on such and such a date, this is going to happen. it's bits and pieces that are put together, and one piece of evidence leading to another and another and another after that. that's really what's going on now. you have to make sure the translation is accurate. you have to make sure that many small pieces can be tied together. i can see it taking several times, going through the same evidence before we see how it all connects, how any of it connects. but this is -- i believe it's going to be extremely helpful to us and the fact that those s.e.a