Navy SEAL Rob O'Neill: "The More I Look At It, The Less It Makes Sense"
:::caution Legal Disclaimer Nothing on this page is a claim of fact that any living person or organization knew of, planned, participated in, or covered up any crime, or acted illegally, immorally, or unethically. This page records questions and opinions expressed by a named commentator in a public broadcast — not findings of fact. All persons and organizations named are presumed innocent; the allegations referenced are unproven and have not been established in any court. Tyler Robinson is charged, not convicted. :::
4 minutes 37 seconds. Rob O'Neill on Redacted, identified on screen as "Fmr. US Navy Seal, The man who killed Bin Laden" (X: @mchooyah). Source: @RedactedNews on X, August 17, 2026. Mirrored to IPFS by this investigation so it survives deletion, CID QmafHo4Szu56hSxaDGPavDQJQiaVa7VpkypDY3goTTRJ57. If the player does not load, watch the original on X.
On August 17, 2026, the news program Redacted — hosted by Clayton Morris and Natali Morris — aired an interview with Robert J. "Rob" O'Neill, the former US Navy SEAL publicly known as the man who says he fired the shots that killed Osama bin Laden. Status: Alive. In it he says the official account of the Charlie Kirk assassination does not survive contact with what he knows about ballistics and shooting people at close range.
His argument is not that he knows what happened. He is explicit that he was not there. It is that a man with his particular professional background looks at the same public material everyone else has and cannot make the pieces fit — and that saying so publicly gets a person called an antisemite rather than answered.
Who is making the claim
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Name | Robert J. "Rob" O'Neill |
| Status | Alive |
| Background | Former US Navy SEAL, SEAL Team Six; publicly identified himself as the shooter in the 2011 bin Laden raid |
| X handle | @mchooyah |
| Where he said it | Redacted, posted by @RedactedNews, August 17, 2026 |
| Reach of the clip | 93,654 views, 5,105 likes, 1,163 reposts as recorded |
O'Neill is relevant here for one narrow reason: the wound. He states his own qualification plainly — "I've killed a lot of people closer than that cameraman, and I've seen what happens. I've seen entry wounds and exit wounds." That is an experience claim, not a forensic credential, and this page records it as such. It is not a substitute for the autopsy that has still not been released.
The ballistics objection
The heart of it is the .30-06 round the state says was used, set against what O'Neill says such a round does to a human neck:
"I know ballistics. I know what it looks like when someone's shot, and this story they're spinning doesn't make any sense... You know what a 30-06 would do to a man's neck? It would blow his head off. And their response is, oh, he was a superhuman. No, he wasn't."
He describes the first thing he noticed watching the video: no exit wound where one should be, and a shirt that moved as though "there was an impact nearby."
"The moment I saw it was, why? That an exit wound coming out of his neck. And the way his shirt moved, something, there was an impact nearby... Immediately it didn't make sense."
He also walks through the explanations offered and says they contradicted each other:
- First, that the round ricocheted off body armor. He says he rejected that immediately because a .30-06 does not behave that way.
- Then, that there was no body armor.
Both cannot be the explanation. That contradiction is the same one tracked on Trajectory & Wound Mismatch and Alternative Kill Mechanisms, and it is why the majority view among citizen investigators on X is that the wound is not consistent with a rifle round at all — see Cause of Death and Mic.
The rooftop and the rifle
O'Neill's second objection is tactical, and it is the argument this section already builds out on Backpack & Rifle Impossibility:
"The guy running on the roof, the 30-06 — how this dude, he took it apart, he put it together. He got a scope on there, took a cold war shot, took it apart, jumped on a roof, put it together, wrapped it up."
Reassembling a bolt-action rifle, mounting and zeroing a scope, making a single long shot, then breaking it down and escaping with it, is a sequence he treats as implausible for the person described. He adds the texts: "All of the texts he's sending that don't sound like any 22-year-old I know" — the same objection raised on Discord & Custody Timeline.
The video the FBI has not released
"Why the FBI not release the first 10 seconds of that video that would have shown this guy — your guy, Tyler — laying in a prone position, firing the shot. You release a video of a guy running across the roof, but we never see him actually fire the shot. But we got our guy."
He states that no video evidence has been published placing Tyler Robinson on campus at all. That claim is tracked independently on Tyler on Surveillance Cameras and Stairs Guy Identity Gap — where the figure on the roof and the camera-tracked Tyler do not match on clothing or pack.
He characterizes the announcement sequence as: "the FBI saying, hey, we got him. Hey, we don't got him. Hey, his mom turned him in." See FBI and Gun Discovery Sequence.
The scene, the mic, and the camera
O'Neill raises the crime-scene questions as questions, and says he cannot verify them:
"Is it true that as soon as he was down, his security team took his lapel mic off, gave it to someone else that ran off? What do they do with the SIM card? Did someone take that camera that was right behind him down? Why did they contaminate crime scene immediately? Is it paved over? Did they rebuild it? Is all of that true? I don't know."
Each of those is covered here: the lapel mic on Mic, the Security Team handling, and the paving of the scene under Cover-Up.
"The second you ask, I'm anti-Semitic"
The part of the clip that drew the most engagement is about what happens to the person asking, not about the evidence:
"Even with — if I said it doesn't make sense — like, why are you saying Israel did it? I'm like, I didn't say that. I'm just saying it doesn't look good... But the second you ask, I'm anti-Semitic. And I'm like, I don't even bring up Israel. Why are you bringing up Israel? Is someone getting paid to defend them for something I'm not even talking about?"
Read carefully, that is not an accusation against Israel. It is a complaint about a reply pattern: that the accusation arrives before the answer does. This site tracks that pattern as its own subject under Censorship and Narrative, separate from the substantive question of foreign involvement handled in Israel — Main Suspect.
He closes on the standing he thinks it should buy him:
"No, I've killed a bunch of people for the country. A great American was killed in front of everyone in America. He was for this country. I would like to know why. And stop bullshitting me."
Erika Kirk's forgiveness, and a trial not yet held
One further point he raises, which he himself flags as a tangent:
"With Erika Kirk immediately saying, I forgive him — it's like, well, you just made him guilty. So now he's guilty. Have we had a trial yet?"
The observation is about legal posture, not about Erika Kirk's sincerity: that a public act of forgiveness presumes the guilt of a defendant who has not been tried. Robinson is charged, not convicted. Court progress is tracked at Court and Legal Investigation.
What this is and what it is not
- It is a named, on-the-record expert-adjacent objection from a person with combat shooting experience, published to a large audience, and preserved here in full.
- It is not a forensic finding. O'Neill did not examine the body, the scene, or the rifle, and says so.
- It does not identify who fired anything, or assert that any named person or government was involved.
- It does line up with the physical objections already documented across this section, which is why it sits here rather than in Influencers.