Osama Bin Laden and the changing story

Servo96 on townhall blog summed it up well:

There was a firefight.
Osama "resisted."
There wasn't a firefight.
Osama' daughter says he was captured alive and shot dead.
Osama was armed.
No, he wasn't.
Osama didn't have to be armed to "resist."
The team was supposed to take him alive if possible.
No, it was always a 'kill' mission.
No, they were going to take him alive until the chopper was shot down.
No, it crashed and blew up.
No, it had mechanical trouble and the team blew it up themselves.
Osama lived without TV, Internet or phone.
No, there was clearly a big satellite dish on the building.
Osama had a cell phone on him.
We found a 'treasure trove' of media and intel.
Osama hid behind a woman and she was killed.
The woman was his wife.
No, it was some other woman downstairs.
No, his wife ran at the team and got shot in the leg.
Osama's son was killed.
No, it was some other guy.
Leon Panetta said a photo of Osama would be released soon.
No, President Obama, during an interview taped for “60 Minutes”, said it won't be released.

As pleased as I am to hear that Osama is dead, I am disturbed about the way the story of his death is changing so much. Conflicting information is not uncommon in wartime, so it is not be surprising that we might get different accounts from different sources. For example, the daughter is saying things that conflict with our soldier’s account. This is almost a natural expectation. Not only is the viewpoint different, but motivation is strong to present the events in a different light. What is disturbing is that the ‘official’ information from Washington is changing so much. I would expect that our government would take the time to make certain that the information is accurate before it is released. Naturally, mistakes can be made. But the quantity of the changes here do not give me confidence that our government is being completely honest with us.

I really want to believe that Osama Bin Laden is dead. I also want to believe our government is telling us the actual facts as much as security can allow. This administration was to be the most transparent in a long time, if ever. This ‘incident’ does not give me much confidence that we are actually being told the accurate story. This also brings into question my confidence about other issues that this administration is addressing and what it is telling the American public. Even though I might disagree with him, I want to think that at least President Obama actually believes what he is telling us.