60 Minutes 9/9/12 - "Mark Owen" on killing of Osama bin Laden

I thought it was interesting. I was appalled to learn at the end that some news/magazine source tracked down his real name and released it. disgusting.

 

I also thought it was interesting. They were mighty lucky the helicopter crashed exactly like it did.

As far as his real name getting out ... in this day and age you've gotta assume that someone is going to track it down and release it. Information is everywhere and there is an army of people on the internet itching to mine for nuggets like this. I don't agree with it, but it is what it is.

 

Advertisements

He shouldn't have written a book and chased a pot of gold if he wanted to remain anonymous.

 

I loved the tidbit about how the point guy whispered "khalid" and the dumbass stuck his head out!

I almost feel like the Pentagon must not really mind this book being published despite the official, public condemnation of it. I really believe that if the United States Government/Military wanted information suppressed, they could easily accomplish it.
This way, the world gets to hear how amazing our special forces are without any real military secrets being revealed.
I can't wait to read the book.

 

I have no doubt that the Pentagon doesn't mind - I wouldn't be surprised if they solicited or directed him to do it as PR of some sort.

I agree nobody should be surprised his name was leaked. Still disgusting that people would do it.

 

I was curious about some of the details. Initially he said three helicopters (blackhawks) one in the courtyard, one to fast rope to the roof and one to land outside for security. Then when he talked about the attack and they showed the animation there were only two. One crashed and the other did security. What happened to the 3rd? Did they scrap it before they started?

I thought the point guy on the stairs and the way he killed Khalil was very interesting, Khalil was not too bright.

 

He didn't say 3. He said the security one would go to the roof after dropping off the external unit.

 

You're of course assuming (without foundation) that he did this to chase a pot of gold, as opposed to wanting to have a proper written record made of a highly significant moment in history.

 

He wrote the story because he says the President lied about what happened. The original story released said OBL was armed. In the book version he was shot while unarmed. And then shot three more times while laying dead on the floor.
This guy is a disgrace to the SEALS who all took an oath not reveal any details of any of the missions they went on. Now every terrorest group is getting all fired up and will try to kill every American soldier they can find.
The whole reason for the book is to make the President look bad. This guy was probabaly paid by the GOP to publish the book. Now he says he is going to donate all the money to charity. The foundation that helps SEALS told him to keep the money they didnt want any part of it.

 

If the whole reason for the book was to make the President look bad, then why didn't I get that sense at all from watching the interviewed that was based on the book?

Do you have specific passages from the book that would clarify this?

 

Yeah, I am not too sure I understand this one either, and I am always on the lookout for a GOP conspiracy, so help me out on this one.

 

This is what bothers me. They are blood brothers, sworn to each other. How he could do this just astounds me.

I have a nephew who is a SEAL. Seal Team Eight, based in Virginia. Next time I see him I'll ask him what the SEAL consensus is on this guy.

 

Well if they are sworn to each other, as you say, he may not say much.

..and I'm not understanding the outrage...he extolled the virtues and professionalism of the SEAL team. Since when has that been deserving of scorn?

..and for all we know, the whole thing is just smoke and mirrors perpetuated by the gov't and military to cover what really happened. Whether it was misdirection about how they run their training, or the equipment they use, etc...Really easy, since people tend to digest whatever they are served up.

still an interesting interview.

 

We already know what happened. The only significant difference is that he says bin Laden wasn't armed. Frankly, I don't care if bin Laden were armed or not. He could have been playing butt naked Twister with his wives when he was shot for all I care.

 

This.


I AM interested in this story. And the Maarsk story, too! But if a SEAL is supposed to have a code of silence and he breaks the code, well, he has to suffer the consequences.

If you want to stay secret, stay secret. You can'y go and right a book spilling the secrets, expecting your identity to stay secret.

 

Exactly. 3000 people in the WTC weren't armed when he attacked either.

As for the book, from what I gather, he had some criticisms of the Prez in the book, but CBS didn't talk about it at all. I guess we'll have to read the book and see.

 

wonder what he thinks about "Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive"