Pat Tillman and Bush secrecy

This is absolutely disgusting, what has gone on with this case. Truly sickening, as is the use of the handsome Tillman as 'military porn' right after his death

 

This has been on this guy's site for a few months and as best I can tell it wasn't updated after the last few days' developments.

http://www.johntreed.com/Tillman.html

 

seem like this story has been underplayed a bit?

bush shouldn't be impeached, he should be imprisoned

 

If he was murdered (and until yesterday, I tended to think he wasn't, now I don't know) was it simply somebody in his unit who had a problem with him or was it a hit ordered from somebody higher up?

 

Ragu --
Please.
ESPN is committed to the Army version of events because the Army gave ESPN an earlier exclusive. (Not for nothing, but is SI going to give Gary Smith a third crack at this story?) In other words, ESPN invested itself in the last version of the CYA on this episode. I didn;t see the ESPN piece and I'm wondering how the deal with the passage in the new documents about how the Army guys were congratulating each other on keeping the investigators at bay. Why would they do that?
"Conspiracy theory" is an easy way to marginalize the people, like the Tillmans who never bought this story in the first place. Suddenly, the people who called the bullshit for what it is are complicit in its consequences?Sorry, I no longer trust the US Army on the subject of Pat Tillman's death as far as I can throw the Pentagon. I think he was killed, deliberately, by someone in his unit for reasons we do not know. (Pique and/or panic work as well for me as anything.)

 

I never understood why they, his fellow soldiers, burnt Tillman's gear after his death.
That always seemed coverup-ish to me and the coverage of Tillman's death has leaned to Band of Brothers romanticism, so it hasn't been an objective reporting of the facts.
When I hear about Tillman, I always think of Animal House and the fate of the ROTC guy, "shot in Vietnam by his men."

 

I've assumed for a few months now that the cover-up is because he was killed intentionally by other soldiers.

When the details of the friendly fire shooting came out a while ago, a group of people in the newsroom were talking about it and wondering how it could happen. A photog who is a Vietnam vet said "Usually it happens because the guy's a fucking asshole, and someone's waiting for a firefight to take him out and pretend it's an accident."

 

Even odder, PC, according to that article on the AP documents: "No evidence at all of enemy fire was found at the scene - no one was hit by enemy fire, nor was any government equipment struck." Kinda casts some doubt on whether there even actually was a firefight to provide that pretext.

Before yesterday I'd assumed the murder murmurings were just conspiracy freak nonsense. Now I'm wondering. And you're right, friendly fire incidents are common enough that you've got to wonder why the Army would run the enormous risk of a cover up unless there was more to it.

 

First, the casket pictures that weren't allowed weren't being shot in Iraq. Information from there flows and has flown fairly freely, much more so than in Desert Storm. With sat phones and the internet, journalists there don't need the military to transmit their stories and pictures or act as couriers for them. I speak from some experience on this. Not in the combat zone, but close enough.
The casket dictum applied to the loading of the caskets at Wiesbaden Air Force Base (I believe) and the unloading at Dover AFB in Delaware.
What time of day was the Tillman incident? Since we're talking about Rangers and special ops guys, they are trained to do the bulk of their action under the cover of darkness. Even at night, with night vision, telling friend from foe under fire is no easy feat.
Thirdly, believe me, the Pentagon can do a very good job of polishing, varnishing and otherwise obsfucating what really goes on, even to the detriment of the civilian leadership. In other words, they could have found quickly what happened and then decided not to let it go any further or higher up the chain of command. The fewer people who know, the less chances there are for leaks.
I don't doubt that something fishy happened between the Army and the White House, but I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't a predominantly Army snafu.
Also, while demoting a retired general may seem odd, no general is truly retired. They can be recalled to service at a whim. Case in point - the most recent former Chief of Staff of the Army, the Army's top general, was pulled out of retirement (mainly because none of the active duty ones wanted to deal with Rumsfeld directly).
I would really hate to think that Tillman was deliberately offed by some of his own troops. That would send the Army into the smoke and mirrors defense, as abhorrent as it is.

 

Don't forget how much the Army out and out twisted the whole Jessica Lynch affair. Forgot about that one until I was talking with my brother (former force recon Marine) a few minutes ago.

 

The thing is, the military and probably others higher up, knew how Tillman was killed and decided to Wag the Dog and make up some better story to conjure up more support for the war in Afghanistan. Just like in the Lynch case. It wasn't until she talked and the doctor who treatec her talked that we found out the truth.

This is why the 9/11 conspiracies still live on with some credibility (remember the ABC News report about the neocons strategy to take down Saddam from 19-friggin-97? We need a "Pearl Harbor like event" to garner the support of the American people, otherwise it won't happen.)