There is a new official account of Sunday night, check it out in the New York Times article.

According to the reports, the following information has been released to the public:
1. Osama was NOT armed.
2. There was heavy fire from others in the house.
3. Osama’s wife was shot in the leg, but not killed.
4. Navy seals did not know if Osama wore a suicide bomb and acted in a split second decision to shoot him.
5. “Several experts on the rules of engagement in combat said that in a raid on a target as dangerous as Bin Laden, the Navy Seals team would be justified to open fire at the slightest commotion when they burst into a room.”
6. There was a plan to take Osama alive, and if he had surrendered, he would have been captured.
7. He was killed early Monday morning, not Sunday night.
8. Officials are still deciding to release pictures of his body or not. “It looks like him, covered in blood with a hole in his head,” an official said.

So dear Brandeis, what do we think? Are the marines justified in shooting Osama while he was unarmed? Was this an illegal operation? Has the story changed because it was late and the government wanted to release information quickly, or did they purposely manipulate details?

Edit: Hey guys! I misremembered the information when I wrote this post. They were Navy seals, not marines. My bad.

One comment on “Does this new information change anything?”

  1. Dani B. Says:

    Speaking of manipulating details they weren’t marines like you say in this article, they were navy SEALs.