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 thats 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.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member