Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SEAL who shot bin Laden speaks out

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dalem
    replied
    Originally posted by dalem View Post
    Maybe he's a jerk and no one likes him.

    -dale
    Looks like I might've been right. :)

    -dale

    Leave a comment:


  • troung
    replied
    Ymmv
    esquire is screwed: Duped by fake ubl “shooter”
    by brandon webb march 25, 2013 posted in: Sof news
    screen shot 2013-03-22 at 1.18.08 pm

    as much as i like to dodge the seal drama train these days, there are still a couple of big stories that have left the station before naval special warfare’s warcom could put the brakes on. First female navy seal? It’s coming, and in a way you’d never expect…
    related posts

    ubl shooter should maintain some professional dignity
    sofrep exclusive: Fbi’s hrt kill new york shooter
    becoming a navy seal sniper: Part two

    one story coming out of joint special operations command is that the esquire “shooter” isn’t the shooter after all. To be clear, he wasn’t the point man that put the well placed rounds into ubl’s head that ended the terrorist leaders life. Sure he was there, and deserves credit but he wasn’t the man who shot ubl, and ended his life. And this is an important fact that must be clarified.

    The actual shooter at naval special warfare development group (nsw devgru or seal team 6) has continued to maintain his professional integrity and has not come forward with the story, and most likely never will. Looks like esquire and bronstein are the ones who are really screwed, not their interviewee; our sources say he’s off cashing large checks from unsuspecting donors who bought the esquire pity piece.

    Here are some interesting insider facts:

    The “shooter” was removed from his devgru squadron for talking about the operation openly after being warned to “can it’
    he was encouraged by leadership to remain in the seal community to finish out his career and gain his full retirement benefits
    apparently against his concerns about personal security he has been very active on the public speaking circuit

    one anonymous jsoc seal we spoke with says…

    there was a discussion among all the seals before the raid that none of them wanted to shoot ubl in the head in order to preserve his face for the pictures that we would need to take to help identify the body.

    Ok, according to “the shooter,” he was the second man in the stack behind the point man. They had no backup, and so, because they were in a hurry, it was just him and the point man that assaulted up the stairs. I don’t know a single seal who would be in a rush to assault the third floor with just two men, there is no hostage so there is no need to hurry. Also, all the people waiting on the third deck had the most time to prepare a defense, so why would you only assault the third floor with just two seals. This makes no sense and is simply not what happened.

    The shooter claims that the point man took a few shots as the man sticks his head out the door…. Ok we all agree on that. But here is where is story goes sideways again. The shooter claims that the point man, after taking his shots towards the adult male standing in the door, that he then turned his attention towards the women in the hallway. There were zero women in the hallway. Also, zero shooters are going to take shots at an unidentified adult male, and then simply peal off without following up to see if he hit that target, to go deal with unarmed women. After the point man engaged toward the unknown male (ubl), he did follow his shots and entered the room. When he saw that ubl was on the floor and no longer a threat, he dropped his weapon, and then at that point dealt with the unarmed females. Even the shooter and no easy day say that the point man handled the women.

    My point is, the point man would have never dropped his cover on the adult male had he not been 200% sure he was no longer a threat. According to the shooter, the point man stayed in the hallway to deal with the women. Simply not true, because no seal i know would have dropped the cover on the male in the room that he had just shot at. The shooter now claims that he enters the room and looks at ubl and shoots him twice in the face as ubl was going for his gun. There was no weapon found in ubls room until about 5 min into the search, and was found above the door on a shelf. Again, this has never been disputed by anybody, so if the shooter was so sure he was going for his gun….how could he see it???

    His story is complete bull shit, and he is covering his ass for the why he would have shot ubl at this point. If the shooter is correct and is looking at an unarmed ubl, according to the roe’s, he should have simply detained ubl. Not shot him in the head.

    The shooter goes on to explain that he shot him twice in the head… why did he do this when we discussed before the op not to shoot him in the head for identification purposes? The fact is that the point man did connect and hit ubl in the head. The head shot was the only thing that presented a target for the point man to shoot at….so that’s what he shot at!!!! The point man, after shooting at the mans head, entered the room….saw that ubl was no longer a threat and then pushed the women back. The shooter was the 3 man into the room, and he just re-engaged into the body laying on the floor.

    I’ve seen an article from berghain (an author that actually was at the compound after the raid). He talks about blood splatter on the ceiling. While i don’t think that he is a csi crime scene investigator, he’s made comments that he thinks the blood splatter backs up the shooter’s story. Well, the shooter is approx 6’4″ and ubl was approx the same height. That would mean the shots were level and not aimed up. The real shooter and point man is about 5’5,” and was shooting up the stairs toward the head exposed through the doorway. That would create the angle that is needed to splatter blood on the ceiling.

    Everybody within jsoc knows the shooter is full of it. Shortly after the raid, he was fired from devgru because of his mouth and talking too much. This is something that is not told in the article either. He’s the stereotypical guy who was running around at the bar telling all the chicks that he was the shooter. While indeed he did shoot, he shot the body as it was 99.9% dead and dying on the floor. The point man up the stairs landed his shots to the head, which is why he changed his focus to the women.

    Interesting. Sorry to rain on your parade, phil, but your guy is not the actual shooter.


    Read more: Esquire Is Screwed: Duped By Fake UBL "Shooter" | SOFREP

    Leave a comment:


  • doppelganger
    replied
    I think it is the greatness of the American civilization and the maturity of its foundations that they do not even lionize someone who put their enemy No. 1 to death.

    Leave a comment:


  • S2
    replied
    citanon Reply

    He was unemployed and complaining about it. Is this incorrect?

    "The "Shooter" specifically talked about the VA benefits, but what he said was that the same was not available for his family....there is nothing there to suggest that the "Shooter" wasn't well aware of his transition options, or the benefits he was forfeiting by quitting early. He just didn't like the options."

    Sooo..., well aware but displeased with his options, not for himself but his family, he chose to exercise leaving in any case.

    "...There was also nothing there to suggest that he isn't "getting his act together" or doing what he needs to do to "overcome", and there wasn't much to suggest that he regrets any part of his leaving. Just a bit grumpy at times and a little nervous given nothing's settled."

    Great. No regrets. So why express his grumpiness?

    Oh well...killing OBL gave him the vehicle to whine. Not sure what's caught him by surprise after-the-fact of separation. Glad unemployment, an absence of benefits and nervous concerns for family constitute a well-adjusted man with a balanced view of the future to you.

    Not me though.

    Leave a comment:


  • citanon
    replied
    Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
    At any rate I feel that some here perhaps are too quick to judge.

    Sorry, but I am calling bullshit on that statement.

    To have been so totally oblivious to all that is available upon separation from service these days someone is either lying or a total idiot....and idiots don't get into DEVGRU.
    Unless you misread the article, there was nothing there to suggest that the "Shooter" wasn't well aware of his choices. The reporter wrote some comments that were inaccurate, which were later corrected, but it was the reporter's lines not the "Shooter's". The "Shooter" specifically talked about the VA benefits, but what he said was that the same was not available for his family.

    If you read the article carefully, there is nothing there to suggest that the "Shooter" wasn't well aware of his transition options, or the benefits he was forfeiting by quitting early. He just didn't like the options.

    There was also nothing there to suggest that he isn't "getting his act together" or doing what he needs to do to "overcome", and there wasn't much to suggest that he regrets any part of his leaving. Just a bit grumpy at times and a little nervous given nothing's settled.

    One might have gotten the idea that it was something else from reading the Cliff Notes version of the article on Yahoo, maybe.

    Leave a comment:


  • Albany Rifles
    replied
    At any rate I feel that some here perhaps are too quick to judge.

    Sorry, but I am calling bullshit on that statement.

    To have been so totally oblivious to all that is available upon separation from service these days someone is either lying or a total idiot....and idiots don't get into DEVGRU.

    Leave a comment:


  • citanon
    replied
    Originally posted by McFire View Post
    Yep...and it's a risk he obviously regrets...and as as risk taker, he knew the consequences. It's the same decision every US military member makes around the 15 or 16 year mark. The Navy gave him options...and he opted not to take any of them.
    It's not clear to me what he thinks about the risk or his current prospect. In fact throughout the article it's difficult to separate how he feels from how the reporter feels on his behalf, and even with his quotes it's hard to tell whether they are transitory expressions of frustration versus true regret. Myself, for example, am surrounded by scientists who constantly bitch about the financial consequences of a career in science, but would never ever go back on their decision.

    At any rate I feel that some here perhaps are too quick to judge.

    Leave a comment:


  • Native
    replied
    Originally posted by McFire View Post
    Since 2001, military members could participate in the Thrift Savings Program and can contribute to it while on active duty. It's essentially the same TSP the Civil Service employees use. Unfortunately, since most new military members are young and don't think "long-term," many do not utilize it, especially if they can't touch the money until they are 59 1/2 years old without a tax penalty. (I wish they'd have had the TSP when I enlisted in 1987!)
    Thank you McFire, I too missed it. 1986-2000.

    Leave a comment:


  • Albany Rifles
    replied
    Originally posted by troung View Post
    He didn't get to make a movie, write a million dollar book, or get hired to consult for video games - there is a wide range of jobs out there. The tone of the articles makes one wonder how hard he looked for work after his retirement plans failed to pan out.
    As Judge Smails said "The world needs ditch diggers, too."

    Leave a comment:


  • Gun Grape
    replied
    Regarding his statement that he lost health care the day he got out. Its not true. All Iraq and Afgan vets get 5 years of free health care through the VA. After that you only get free care for service connected disabilities, unless you have a disability rating of 50% or more.

    When he went through his transition class, he would have been told this

    Leave a comment:


  • troung
    replied
    He didn't get to make a movie, write a million dollar book, or get hired to consult for video games - there is a wide range of jobs out there. The tone of the articles makes one wonder how hard he looked for work after his retirement plans failed to pan out.
    Last edited by troung; 15 Feb 13,, 02:20.

    Leave a comment:


  • McFire
    replied
    Originally posted by citanon View Post
    ...Being a risk taker, he decides to call it quits and do something more meaningful rather than having to waste 4 years of life at his prime...

    Yep...and it's a risk he obviously regrets...and as as risk taker, he knew the consequences. It's the same decision every US military member makes around the 15 or 16 year mark. The Navy gave him options...and he opted not to take any of them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Major Dad
    replied
    Originally posted by citanon View Post
    I reckon it went something like this:

    May 2, 2011, guy shoots Bin Laden. High point of his career.

    2 days later, he realizes that the shot also ended his career and the careers of most of his teammates: JSOC will never ever send them out to the field again. The risk of having some two bit terrorist get in a lucky shot on him and then being able to claim to the world that Al Qaeda has avenged the Sheik, is far too great. It's now paramount to keep him and the rest of that particular team out of harms way. They will now have to go through military life practically wearing foam padding to prevent bumps and bruises. It's either that or he tries to climb the officer ranks.

    Being a risk taker, he decides to call it quits and do something more meaningful rather than having to waste 4 years of life at his prime on the BS outlined above. Trouble is he can't tell anyone else what he has done and can't point to a record to show them what he is capable of. Instead he faces the prospect of starting all over again, working for others of far lesser capability and professionalism than his former team mates. So he's looking for something better. In the mean time, it's uncertain and frustrating. He chats about it on occasion with his journalist neighbor. It ends up on Esquirer in an article that happens to make him sound like a whining twit. We all read, sit back surprised, and opine wisely in judgement.

    Sounds about right?
    OK, so "he can't tell anyone else what he has done" but then he "chats about it on occasion with his journalist neighbor" (WTF??) and innocently discloses that 1) he is a SEAL, 2) he was on the Abbotabad mission, and 3) that he is the actual guy that terminated bin Laden? LOL The best thing he can do to protect his family is go home and kill himself. As long he acts with this kind of flagrant disregard of even the most basic security measures, there is nothing the government, or anyone else, can do to protect them from his own stupidity.

    Leave a comment:


  • Stitch
    replied
    DEVGRU has "in excess of 300" members, I seriously doubt "No. 2" was on-board that chopper.

    Leave a comment:


  • citanon
    replied
    Originally posted by astralis View Post
    assuming that AQ actually knows which unit, let alone which people, actually did this...

    if prince harry can fight in afghanistan, so too will they.
    Not AQ, the press. If some of the principals in that operation got killed later, you don't think it will leak? AQ does not have to "get" them, it just have to get lucky.

    Also, look at that team, we know of at least 2 members now that left right after or there abouts. Prince Harry, important as he is, is not taking the same kind of risks as a Team Six SEAL. Illustrated, again, by what happened shortly after to the other chalk.

    I could be wrong, but I think I have pretty good odds of being right.
    Last edited by citanon; 14 Feb 13,, 22:08.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X