Which other thread? There are only about 20. 
I’m interested in looking because I was wondering if thinking the attack came from the ship was based on an actual report, or if it was someone making assumptions when reading that he was buried at sea from the Vinson.
The linked article agrees with what I read in the Times. Given that the Seals were immediately greeted by gunfire, I think it is hard to question their actions, especially given that they found weapons, not surprising, and that it was dark. If OBL put his hands up and fell to the floor, maybe he would have made it out alive, but I don’t think you’d expect any Seal to want to wait for him to go for his guns. That the only woman killed was in a firefight, and OBL’s wife was only injured, and not badly, argues against it being an indiscriminate raid.
In a roundabout fashion, the changing details of the story indicate its veracity. It’s easy to tell a lie and stick to it. There’s not much point in lying if you’re going to change the lie so often (and not always in ways that benefit you) that people wonder why you’re changing it. If the administration wanted people to think he was unarmed to defuse the ‘blaze of glory’ theory, they could have just said at the beginning that he was unarmed.
And from other sources I’ve read this morning. I sounds like only the first guy who shot at the SEALs was armed, four or five other guys were killed while the team quickly closed in on OBL and he was quickly shot, maybe while going for a weapon. He had an AK-47 and a pistol available. They were concerned about a suicide bomb.
There was no 40 minute ‘fire fight’, that was the length of time spent on the ground, probably gathering intelligence and destroying the crashed copter.
Another report I heard on the way home this morning was that there were “half a dozen” weapons there. Wow! My home is more heavily armed than Osama’s fortified compound?
I think it will take several more news cycles to get the official version agreed upon and the actual facts may remain known to only a few, or be told much later when it isn’t such an issue.
Nice job however it was done.
And don’t get me wrong, I do not think that there is any official mis-information going on. It is just that media speculation often turns in to reported fact a few steps down the line.
The chattering heads of the media are in full feeding frenzy. Who knows when we will get actual ‘news’.
That’s exactly what they want you to think! 
That assumes they thought about the implications of how this was communicated early on, and it’s clear they didn’t. I’m still not going to believe anything the WH tells us about the details of this raid. I don’t expect them to be telling the truth, because the details don’t really matter to us. They did what they did the way they did it, and no one is going to judge them one way or another. It’s done.
That also occurred to me. 
I’m not necessarily taking it all at face value either, but I find it easier to accept that they’re still getting more information than to accept that they didn’t think about what they were announcing.
Cuz he was a bitch and wanted to die like a bitch!
He died while pleading forgiveness from the Lord, Jesus Christ.
Me, too. That little factoid has had me smiling all morning!
Ha! Now the religious right will see him in heaven. Doesn’t seem like such a great place now, does it?
Huh, the reports I saw said Chinooks, and supposedly they were very loud, not stealthy. Confusion reigns.
Blackhawks or Chinooks.
Which story is told today?
Huh. Confusion reigns.
There. I fixed it for you!
I knew/read about the first part (mission launch) it’s just that I don’t recall reading anything about what the itinerary was after the mission – what you say is the most logical procedure, but again, has that been made official anywhere? Because the story as it stands now, at least implies that the body was flown directly to sea.
I was speculating about the after events. I haven’t seen any reports of the details. It just doesn’t seem logical to me that we’d fly his body over Afghanistan in a chopper, and risk having it shot down. Get it up in jet ASAP. Of course, that assumes that a carrier was the final destination.
Well, now that you have leaked the code name of the shooter, Jesus De Christobal, a SEAL from Puerto Rico, expect a call…
On the contrary, they clearly wanted to get the story out there as quickly as possible, which is why it was announced late Sunday night, hardly prime news time. (But it got the highest rating of any Obama speech.) Given that the people at the WH were thousands of miles from the scene, and got their information from someone who was basing his on incomplete debriefings of a lot of SEALs, you have to expect that not every detail will be right. The alternative would have been to give almost no details, and how do you think that would have gone down? Rachel Maddow said on TDS that there was an incredible demand for details. I don’t think we will know for sure until we get a report created with input from everyone on the scene, with contradictions double checked.
I haven’t noticed reporters being hard on the WH for this, possibly because they know full well that reporting in the heat of the moment makes you get things wrong, and because they’d much rather have some facts now than perfect facts in three days.
I would have told everybody that he soiled himself and begged for mercy before being shot by one of his own men who was disgusted by his cowardice.
I don’t see what is “contrary” there. Nothing you posted really disagrees or refutes anything in my post.
What’s contrary is your statement that they didn’t care about the details. I see no evidence that they didn’t do the best they could in giving an accurate account, and in giving new information as it becomes available. It is refreshing to see them admitting they had it wrong early and giving more accurate information now instead of stonewalling or distorting the story to make it look as if they were right.