© 2024 Blaze Media LLC. All rights reserved.
Former SEAL That Could Put an End to Who Shot bin Laden Controversy Will 'Never Go Public
Osama bin Laden (Photo: AP)

Former SEAL That Could Put an End to Who Shot bin Laden Controversy Will 'Never Go Public

"...doesn't think he did anything special."

Osama bin Laden (Photo: AP)

Controversy over the former SEAL Team 6 member who killed Osama bin Laden two years ago was reignited earlier this week with two accounts from an anonymous SEAL claiming the man in the now infamous Esquire article, dubbed "the shooter," was not in fact the man who fired the fatal shot.

Brandon Webb, a former Navy SEAL himself, with SOFREP.com (the Special Operations Forces Report) pointed out issues with "the shooter's" story earlier this week with an unnamed SEAL saying Esquire's source was "full of it." CNN's national security analyst Peter Bergen a couple days later published an account from an anonymous SEAL Team 6 operator who noted similar inconsistencies in Esquire's "the shooter" story as it fit with other accounts, like the book "No Easy Day" by pseudonym author Mark Owen

Now, ABC News is reporting yet another unnamed former SEAL Team 6 member coming out and saying there is one man who could put all this controversy to bed -- but he won't.

"You're never going to hear from him," the ex-SEAL told ABC. "I've spoken to him. He's just the type that doesn't care about it... [He] doesn't think he did anything special. He simply pulled the trigger when he was supposed to. That's why he'll never go public."

Bergen too included in his piece for CNN that many past and present SEAL Team 6 members would maintain the man who fired the fatal shot at bin Laden would never speak about his involvement.

In an email to TheBlaze, Webb with SOFREP said the SEAL who he and others believe actually fired the fatal shot against bin Laden is known as a professional who wants no credit and "will likely never speak openly about the operation."

Webb said he thinks this is a good position.

"The Command has been historically very critical of any SEALs in the public eye. Now they find themselves uncomfortably dead center in the spot light, and they have been put there by members of their own unit, and nobody else," Webb said. "The SEAL community needs time to sort out this out internally, and then to get back to work."

Among the many inconsistencies claimed of Esquire's story by CNN and SOFREP's sources, they still acknowledge that the man saying he was "the shooter" was there and might have fired a shot at bin Laden. But it wasn't the one that ended his life. This, Webb said in his article, "is an important fact that must be clarified."

Or as Webb's source wrote, "While indeed he did shoot, he shot the body as it was 99.9% dead and dying on the floor."

Still, Phil Bronstien, who authored Esquire's article and is the executive chairman for the Center for Investigative Reporting, sticks by the story he wrote and his source's claims. He told ABC these accounts by other SEALS are "extraordinarily speculative... about what they would've done, what they shouldn't have done."

Esquire's official response from editor David Granger to the claims made in SOFREP and CNN's stories includes pointing out that a spokesman for Special Operations Command previously told Wired he had no issue with the original story. Addressing CNN's story, Granger wrote that the publication and Bronstein "object to CNN's report in the strongest possible terms." He calls Bergen's story "a mere act of assertion" that is "based on the opinion of one current SEAL who was not on the bin Laden mission and who therefore could not have first-hand knowledge of it."

"It is little more than gossip," Granger continued.

Webb responded to Granger's statements in an email to TheBlaze saying the publication does not seem to be "looking objectively at the situation." He continued:

Sure their guy was on the raid, is known in the community and would have checked out. There's never been an issue with any of that. The main issue I have with their story is the "shooters" embellishment of his role in the operation, and Bronstein's lack of understanding and reporting around how the military and Veterans Affairs (VA) entitlement programs work. If Bronstein had done his homework he would have understood that their shooter was eligible for his paid retirement and full medical benefits in four years. Was that question ever asked, "Why did you give these benefits up?".  It was his decision alone, and not anyone in government. There are also numerous paid VA benefits available for eduction, and job training that is available to the "shooter".

Webb said the portrayal of the "the shooter" appearing to have been "screwed by the American government" shows a lack of reporting about how the benefit system works, which is "an embarrassment to anyone serving in the military."

This story has been updated to add more thoughts shared with TheBlaze from SOFREP's Brandon Webb.



Want to leave a tip?

We answer to you. Help keep our content free of advertisers and big tech censorship by leaving a tip today.
Want to join the conversation?
Already a subscriber?