I’m not sure a precedent needs to be set here, given that details of the raid were already leaked. If he was revealing an op that took place that was not known to the public, that would be one thing. But all he’s doing is correcting the record on an op that is well known, where nearly every important detail was already leaked. The only secrets to give away are where the administration wasn’t telling the truth, which is what this guy says about how bin Laden died. They say he was reaching for a weapon, the SEAL says he just poked his head out the door.
How can he be correcting the record when there’s no more proof of his version than the official?
Then it all comes down to who you believe.
You stated he was correcting the record. Obviously you are privy to some information that he has that the public doesn’t. Share.
Then we are in the gray area of having “Free Speech Except Sometimes.” 
Actually, according to the Washington Post review, the “Mark Owen” book doesn’t really say much about the politics, and doesn’t seem to be particularly disrespectful (though the author and his comrades in arms aren’t particularly sympathetic to the current CinC):
This is NOT a gray area. In order to get a clearance you sign agreements. You are not forced to sign those agreements, you are free to go back to your primary MOS. One of those agreements is that anything you publish must be vetted PRIOR to release. And, it isn’t just some paragraph that you initial off. In my experience, they make darn sure you understand that even if you see XYZ on the news, you are still not free to discuss it and anything written (relating to your activities) must be vetted BEFORE release.
We’re not talking about a guy who washed dishes at Quantico and told of their super secret SOS recipe. We have troops over there that could be put at risk and there are his team mates who could also be put at risk. Even if the book contains NOTHING, he still had to have it VETTED and he did not do it. So, yes he broke the agreement and should be held accountable for it, no matter what is contained in the book.
Again, this has NOTHING to do with Free Speech.
I’d think it has everything to do with it, but in the military one understandably must give that up in some circumstances.
That is his intent.
If I work for ABC Corporation and sign an NDA to not disclose their closely held secrets, I can’t just turn around and sell that information to the competitor or put it into a book. So, if the author signed an NDA agreement to give up his right to Free Speech (in relation to his activities) as part of his clearance, then please explain how this is an issue of Free Speech.
Why do you give more credence to his account?
That’s what you’ve chosen to presume his intent is. I don’t know what’s in the book, but unless it shows Bin Laden isn’t dead, I’m thinking it’s not going to move the figurative needle.
You described it rather well above.
I see that others have explained, but just to pile on…
The military, and Navy SEALS in particular, have their own definition of “free speech” that is necessarily a lot more restrictive than the definition that applies to an open society. To the other SEALs, it could be that “Mark Owen” yelled fire in a crowded theatre. If he did, he’s going to suffer the consequences.
Leaving the service doesn’t give you a “get out of jail free” card to reveal classified information.
I believe his intent had a lot more dollar signs attached to it then that.
Are you guys seriously unaware that his account differs from the official one, saying he was shot on sight instead of only after he’d went back into the room? I’m usually not ahead of you guys, but here’s the BBC article on it.
Whats your source that “Mark Owen” was only in the chopper and not one who took part in the raid? Curious haven’t seen this stated anywhere else.
Well, of course he took part in the raid. He’s already skating on pretty thin ice as it is, if he were a complete fake his ass would be grass. What I mean by “not in the room” was the room Obama was in, where the decisions were being made.
I won’t be buying this garbage. What the hell is this? An attempt to undermine the Obama administration’s handling of the Bin Laden case? What does this jerk have to gain from that? A lame attempt to get Obama out of office?
Mark Owen has a sworn oath to the Seals and to his country not to divulge classified information. And this oath is in effect for his entire life. So if this book does that, he’s toast and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
And Penguin Publishing needs to be prosecuted for profiting off of a breach of National Security.
It is absolutely disgusting for a soldier to outright defy his Comander in Chief. No other President would tolerate such utter disrespect for the office. I hope the adminstration goes after this turd.