Pat Tillman's family says the US Army lied about his death - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

CShine · 05-23-2005, 03:38 AM

Don't know what to add here. The article pretty much speaks for itself.

Quote:

Pat Tillman's family is lashing out at the Army, saying that the military investigations into Tillman's friendly-fire death in Afghanistan last year were a sham and that Army efforts to cover up the truth have made it harder for them to deal with their loss.

More than a year after their son was shot several times by fellow Army Rangers on a hillside near the Pakistani border, Tillman's mother and father said in interviews that they think the military and the government created a heroic tale about how their son died to foster a patriotic response across the country. They say the Army's "lies" about what happened have made them suspicious, and they are certain they will never get the full story.

"Pat had high ideals about the country; that's why he did what he did," Mary Tillman said in her first lengthy interview since her son's death. "The military let him down. The administration let him down. It was a sign of disrespect. The fact that he was the ultimate team player and he watched his own men kill him is absolutely heartbreaking and tragic. The fact that they lied about it afterward is disgusting."

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/card...tillman23.html

highthief · 05-23-2005, 05:44 AM

The modern military (in all countries) still uses propaganda and deception about the realities of war in order to gain support from the populace. An unfortunate incident, but no suprise.

Lebell · 05-23-2005, 06:17 AM

Or it could be one family who, upset at their son's death, are grasping at any straw possible.

Hard to tell from the information presented.

Ustwo · 05-23-2005, 06:36 AM

Fueled by a left wing media who wants no heros, only victims....

ObieX · 05-23-2005, 07:07 AM

Yea, god forbid a parent would want to know how their child really died w/o the democrats brainwashing them into it.

docbungle · 05-23-2005, 07:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Fueled by a left wing media who wants no heros, only victims....

Well, maybe so....but that doesn't take away from how the family would feel after finding out the truth. I mean, from their viewpoint, they think they were lied to, as opposed to it being an honest mistake on the army's part in reporting it as enemy fire. Finding out your son was killed by friendly fire would make it all seem a bit meaningless, I would assume....

OFKU0 · 05-23-2005, 09:22 AM

I assume it would be closure for the family and they do deserve the truth. But he signed up knowing the risks and paid with his life for it. If not for that event this wouldn't be a dicussion.

Interesting also is that the NFL and his hometown made him into a hero but that didn't irk the family. Maybe I'm missing something

Lebell · 05-23-2005, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ObieX

Yea, god forbid a parent would want to know how their child really died w/o the democrats brainwashing them into it.

It is a real possibility that he died exactly the way they were told.

roachboy · 05-23-2005, 09:43 AM

here is a more extensive piece from today's washington post on this.
more information is better.
link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...052200865.html

Quote:

Tillman's Parents Are Critical Of Army
Family Questions Reversal On Cause of Ranger's Death

By Josh White
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, May 23, 2005; Page A01

Former NFL player Pat Tillman's family is lashing out against the Army, saying that the military's investigations into Tillman's friendly-fire death in Afghanistan last year were a sham and that Army efforts to cover up the truth have made it harder for them to deal with their loss.

More than a year after their son was shot several times by his fellow Army Rangers on a craggy hillside near the Pakistani border, Tillman's mother and father said in interviews that they believe the military and the government created a heroic tale about how their son died to foster a patriotic response across the country. They say the Army's "lies" about what happened have made them suspicious, and that they are certain they will never get the full story.

"Pat had high ideals about the country; that's why he did what he did," Mary Tillman said in her first lengthy interview since her son's death. "The military let him down. The administration let him down. It was a sign of disrespect. The fact that he was the ultimate team player and he watched his own men kill him is absolutely heartbreaking and tragic. The fact that they lied about it afterward is disgusting."

Tillman, a popular player for the Arizona Cardinals, gave up stardom in the National Football League after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to join the Army Rangers with his brother. After a tour in Iraq, their unit was sent to Afghanistan in spring 2004, where they were to hunt for the Taliban and Osama bin Laden. Shortly after arriving in the mountains to fight, Tillman was killed in a barrage of gunfire from his own men, mistaken for the enemy as he got into position to defend them.

Immediately, the Army kept the soldiers on the ground quiet and told Tillman's family and the public that he was killed by enemy fire while storming a hill, barking orders to his fellow Rangers. After a public memorial service, at which Tillman received the Silver Star, the Army told Tillman's family what had really happened, that he had been killed by his own men.

In separate interviews in their home town of San Jose and by telephone, Tillman's parents, who are divorced, spoke about their ordeal with the Army with simmering frustration and anger. A series of military investigations have offered differing accounts of Tillman's death. The most recent report revealed more deeply the confusion and disarray surrounding the mission he was on, and more clearly showed that the family had been kept in the dark about details of his death.

The latest investigation, written about by The Washington Post earlier this month, showed that soldiers in Afghanistan knew almost immediately that they had killed Tillman by mistake in what they believed was a firefight with enemies on a tight canyon road. The investigation also revealed that soldiers later burned Tillman's uniform and body armor.

That information was slow to make it back to the United States, the report said, and Army officials here were unaware that his death on April 22, 2004, was fratricide when they notified the family that Tillman had been shot.

Over the next 10 days, however, top-ranking Army officials -- including the theater commander, Army Gen. John P. Abizaid -- were told of the reports that Tillman had been killed by his own men, the investigation said. But the Army waited until a formal investigation was finished before telling the family -- which was weeks after a nationally televised memorial service that honored Tillman on May 3, 2004.

Patrick Tillman Sr., a San Jose lawyer, said he is furious about what he found in the volumes of witness statements and investigative documents the Army has given to the family. He decried what he calls a "botched homicide investigation" and blames high-ranking Army officers for presenting "outright lies" to the family and to the public.

"After it happened, all the people in positions of authority went out of their way to script this," Patrick Tillman said. "They purposely interfered with the investigation, they covered it up. I think they thought they could control it, and they realized that their recruiting efforts were going to go to hell in a handbasket if the truth about his death got out. They blew up their poster boy."

Army spokesmen maintain that the Army has done everything it can to keep the family informed about the investigation, offering to answer relatives' questions and going back to them as investigators gathered more information

Army officials said Friday that the Army "reaffirms its heartfelt sorrow to the Tillman family and all families who have lost loved ones during this war." Brig. Gen. Vincent K. Brooks, an Army spokesman, said the Army acts with compassion and heartfelt commitment when informing grieving families, often a painful duty.

"In the case of the death of Corporal Patrick Tillman, the Army made mistakes in reporting the circumstances of his death to the family," Brooks said. "For these, we apologize. We cannot undo those early mistakes."

Brooks said the Army has "actively and directly" informed the Tillman family regarding investigations into his death and has dedicated a team of soldiers and civilians to answering the family's questions through phone calls and personal meetings while ensuring the family "was as well informed as they could be."

Mary Tillman keeps her son's wedding album in the living room of the house where he grew up, and his Arizona State University football jersey, still dirty from the 1997 Rose Bowl game, hangs in a nearby closet. With each new version of events, her mind swirls with new theories about what really happened and why. She questions how an elite Army unit could gun down its most recognizable member at such close range. She dwells on distances and boulders and piles of documents and the words of frenzied men.

"It makes you feel like you're losing your mind in a way," she said. "You imagine things. When you don't know the truth, certain details can be blown out of proportion. The truth may be painful, but it's the truth. You start to contrive all these scenarios that could have taken place because they just kept lying. If you feel you're being lied to, you can never put it to rest."

Patrick Tillman Sr. believes he will never get the truth, and he says he is resigned to that now. But he wants everyone in the chain of command, from Tillman's direct supervisors to the one-star general who conducted the latest investigation, to face discipline for "dishonorable acts." He also said the soldiers who killed his son have not been adequately punished.

"Maybe lying's not a big deal anymore," he said. "Pat's dead, and this isn't going to bring him back. But these guys should have been held up to scrutiny, right up the chain of command, and no one has."

That their son was famous opened up the situation to problems, the Tillmans say, in part because of the devastating public relations loss his death represented for the military. Mary Tillman says the government used her son for weeks after his death, perpetuating an untrue story to capitalize on his altruism -- just as the Abu Ghraib prison scandal was erupting publicly. She said she was particularly offended when President Bush offered a taped memorial message to Tillman at a Cardinals football game shortly before the presidential election last fall. She again felt as though her son was being used, something he never would have wanted.

"Every day is sort of emotional," Mary Tillman said. "It just keeps slapping me in the face. To find that he was killed in this debacle -- everything that could have gone wrong did -- it's so much harder to take. We should not have been subjected to all of this. This lie was to cover their image. I think there's a lot more yet that we don't even know, or they wouldn't still be covering their tails.

"If this is what happens when someone high profile dies, I can only imagine what happens with everyone else."

Stompy · 05-23-2005, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Fueled by a left wing media who wants no heros, only victims....

I thought we made it clear that there is no such thing as "left wing media"?

highthief · 05-23-2005, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Fueled by a left wing media who wants no heros, only victims....

What has that got to do with the military telling everyone, including the family, a tale they knew to be untrue?

lurkette · 05-23-2005, 11:08 AM

Y'know, it'd be nice if for once people could refrain from knee-jerk partisan reactions and act like adults.

All you lefties - is it possible that the military just...made a mistake? No conspiracy, no propaganda, just garden variety SNAFU? Differing reports by witnesses in a tense, complex situation?

And for the righties: is it possible that our government might have been a teeensie bit red-faced that one of its poster boys was killed in an embarassing friendly-fire fuckup and did everything they could to keep it hushed up for as long as they could?

As it is, I don't see this thread being anything more than a rorschach test for your existing biases, and if you don't start injecting some thought and compassion into this thread instead of the usual sarcasm and bitter bile, I see no reason to leave it open.

feelgood · 05-23-2005, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lurkette

All you lefties - is it possible that the military just...made a mistake? No conspiracy, no propaganda, just garden variety SNAFU? Differing reports by witnesses in a tense, complex situation?

Read this part:

Quote:

Immediately, the Army kept the soldiers on the ground quiet and told Tillman's family and the public that he was killed by enemy fire while storming a hill, barking orders to his fellow Rangers.

And:

Quote:

A series of military investigations have offered differing accounts of Tillman's death. The most recent report revealed more deeply the confusion and disarray surrounding the mission he was on, and more clearly showed that the family had been kept in the dark about details of his death.

And:

Quote:

The latest investigation, written about by The Washington Post earlier this month, showed that soldiers in Afghanistan knew almost immediately that they had killed Tillman by mistake in what they believed was a firefight with enemies on a tight canyon road. The investigation also revealed that soldiers later burned Tillman's uniform and body armor.

And:

Quote:

Over the next 10 days, however, top-ranking Army officials -- including the theater commander, Army Gen. John P. Abizaid -- were told of the reports that Tillman had been killed by his own men, the investigation said. But the Army waited until a formal investigation was finished before telling the family -- which was weeks after a nationally televised memorial service that honored Tillman on May 3, 2004.

I don't think I need to point out more stuff in the article. Does this answer your question?

This has nothing to do with the media, the media is just the medium for the rest of the country. The big issue here is this: The army lied. Period.

The army lied about how Pat Tillman died in combat and the way the army chosed to communiate that to the family was wrong. Every family, regardless of whether it'll be somebody who sent a relative to the war oversea, a firefighter, a police officer, an ordinary citizen, so on so forth, families still deserve to know exactly what happened to them. Even if the people involved with the investigation didn't know what happened, families still want to know what happened, not what might've happened, or not what happened in the interest of outside party, in this case, the third party is the army.

The army lied to that they can project Pat Tillman as a hero, media eats it up and spit it out to the rest of the country and somebody will see the article piece on TV and go "Oh, wow, Pat is sure a hero, I should sign up and do my part for the country" All that bullshit doesn't make it right.

How would you like it if somebody in your family died, say in a fire but it turns out that what actually happened is that some thug picked up your relatives, raped him, murdered him, cut him up in pieces and burn the building down. Which version would you want to know? I would want to know the latter version simply because I want to know how my relative left the world. Did he leave peacefully? I'm happy for that. If he didn't, well, I'm sadden by that. Either way, I still want to know the truth.

smooth · 05-23-2005, 11:17 AM

I don't see how anyone reading the Post's article could conclude that the information presented to the public and Tillman's family was accidentally incorrect.

From that article, it certainly appears as though there were no differing reports--the witnesses knew what they did, attempted to cover it up, and the leadership kept the information to itself.

If someone reached an alternate reading from that article, I'd appreciate an explanation of how you did so.

Locobot · 05-23-2005, 04:53 PM

Let's not forget that the Pat Tillman story was "breaking" at the same time as the abu ghraib scandal. I think I might be a little peeved if I was purposefully lied to about the circumstances of my son's death so that the government could use him as a propaganda tool.

martinguerre · 05-23-2005, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locobot

Let's not forget that the Pat Tillman story was "breaking" at the same time as the abu ghraib scandal. I think I might be a little peeved if I was purposefully lied to about the circumstances of my son's death so that the government could use him as a propaganda tool.

it sounds like one of the good guys got used for covering the bad apples. truely a shame. the family deserved a lot better than to have this much confusion and lack of closure.

analog · 05-23-2005, 11:23 PM

I think a point that's been ignored is that the military owns your ass and can say you died however they please.

People die in the armed services all the time for stupid shit, but families are given a nice, easy to digest story to put their minds at ease. No one gets a letter from the military saying, "we're sorry, but your son fell asleep under a truck and was run over" or "your daughter went to sleep at the base of a sand dune and didn't mark herself off, and a convoy ran her over in the dark". These types of things happen with some frequency.

The military makes humans into machines of war. Those machines cost money. The offset of the cost is owning the rights to your life in whatever way it suits them. Plain and simple.

martinguerre · 05-24-2005, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by analog

I think a point that's been ignored is that the military owns your ass and can say you died however they please.

People die in the armed services all the time for stupid shit, but families are given a nice, easy to digest story to put their minds at ease. No one gets a letter from the military saying, "we're sorry, but your son fell asleep under a truck and was run over" or "your daughter went to sleep at the base of a sand dune and didn't mark herself off, and a convoy ran her over in the dark". These types of things happen with some frequency.

The military makes humans into machines of war. Those machines cost money. The offset of the cost is owning the rights to your life in whatever way it suits them. Plain and simple.

Ummm. Wow. As a civilian who votes for the government that is in charge of that military, i find that highly disturbing.

Mephisto2 · 05-24-2005, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by analog

I think a point that's been ignored is that the military owns your ass and can say you died however they please.

Erm, I don't think they can. If memory serves me correctly, wasn't there several scandals back in the Vietnam era about how the military incorrectly reported the circumstances of deaths? I can't remember for sure.

But I'm quite confident that you will find the Army cannot, let alone SHOULD NOT, lie to relatives about their loved one's death.

Mr Mephisto

analog · 05-24-2005, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martinguerre

Ummm. Wow. As a civilian who votes for the government that is in charge of that military, i find that highly disturbing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

...I'm quite confident that you will find the Army cannot, let alone SHOULD NOT, lie to relatives about their loved one's death.

If it's deemed "classified", they can say whatever they like "in the interest of national security". They can deem whatever they like as "classified". I'm not sure why this comes off as a leap of logic. Not a conspiracy theory, just my observations. You're thinking of the common G.I. Joe and G.I. Jane. I'm thinking of the big picture, all parts of the armed services. In reality, it probably happens more often than we would even bother to guess. You think the families of people on covert, confidential missions are told the truth when the body returns- or doesn't return- from wherever it was? Not a chance. If it's in the interest of the military, it shall be done.

Mephisto2 · 05-24-2005, 09:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by analog

You think the families of people on covert, confidential missions are told the truth when the body returns- or doesn't return- from wherever it was? Not a chance. If it's in the interest of the military, it shall be done.

That's a fair point.

But actively lying about a "regular" friendly fire incident?

Anyway, this is an emotive subject and as a non-American I should keep mum...

Mr Mephisto

analog · 05-24-2005, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

That's a fair point.

But actively lying about a "regular" friendly fire incident?

Yeah, well, prisoners were being tortured, we have headlines to think about.

05-23-2005, 05:44 AM	#2 (permalink)
highthief Junkie Location: Ontario, Canada	The modern military (in all countries) still uses propaganda and deception about the realities of war in order to gain support from the populace. An unfortunate incident, but no suprise. __________________ Si vis pacem parabellum.

05-23-2005, 06:17 AM	#3 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	Or it could be one family who, upset at their son's death, are grasping at any straw possible. Hard to tell from the information presented. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

05-23-2005, 06:36 AM	#4 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Fueled by a left wing media who wants no heros, only victims.... __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

05-23-2005, 07:07 AM	#5 (permalink)
ObieX Pickles Location: Shirt and Pants (NJ)	Yea, god forbid a parent would want to know how their child really died w/o the democrats brainwashing them into it. __________________ We Must Dissent.

05-23-2005, 09:22 AM	#7 (permalink)
OFKU0 Junk	I assume it would be closure for the family and they do deserve the truth. But he signed up knowing the risks and paid with his life for it. If not for that event this wouldn't be a dicussion. Interesting also is that the NFL and his hometown made him into a hero but that didn't irk the family. Maybe I'm missing something __________________ " In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.

05-23-2005, 11:08 AM	#12 (permalink)
lurkette My future is coming on Moderator Emeritus Location: east of the sun and west of the moon	Y'know, it'd be nice if for once people could refrain from knee-jerk partisan reactions and act like adults. All you lefties - is it possible that the military just...made a mistake? No conspiracy, no propaganda, just garden variety SNAFU? Differing reports by witnesses in a tense, complex situation? And for the righties: is it possible that our government might have been a teeensie bit red-faced that one of its poster boys was killed in an embarassing friendly-fire fuckup and did everything they could to keep it hushed up for as long as they could? As it is, I don't see this thread being anything more than a rorschach test for your existing biases, and if you don't start injecting some thought and compassion into this thread instead of the usual sarcasm and bitter bile, I see no reason to leave it open. __________________ "If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing." - Anatole France

05-23-2005, 11:17 AM	#14 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	I don't see how anyone reading the Post's article could conclude that the information presented to the public and Tillman's family was accidentally incorrect. From that article, it certainly appears as though there were no differing reports--the witnesses knew what they did, attempted to cover it up, and the leadership kept the information to itself. If someone reached an alternate reading from that article, I'd appreciate an explanation of how you did so. __________________ "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann "You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

05-23-2005, 04:53 PM	#15 (permalink)
Locobot is awesome!	Let's not forget that the Pat Tillman story was "breaking" at the same time as the abu ghraib scandal. I think I might be a little peeved if I was purposefully lied to about the circumstances of my son's death so that the government could use him as a propaganda tool.

05-23-2005, 11:23 PM	#17 (permalink)
analog Banned	I think a point that's been ignored is that the military owns your ass and can say you died however they please. People die in the armed services all the time for stupid shit, but families are given a nice, easy to digest story to put their minds at ease. No one gets a letter from the military saying, "we're sorry, but your son fell asleep under a truck and was run over" or "your daughter went to sleep at the base of a sand dune and didn't mark herself off, and a convoy ran her over in the dark". These types of things happen with some frequency. The military makes humans into machines of war. Those machines cost money. The offset of the cost is owning the rights to your life in whatever way it suits them. Plain and simple.