PDA

View Full Version : Pat Tillman's Family Angry with Military


Spence
05-23-2005, 08:22 AM
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."
...
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.Source (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/22/AR2005052200865.html)

smoak
05-23-2005, 08:26 AM
I heard about this on the radio, and frankly I agree with the Tillmans 100%. Words can not express how angry I would be if I were in their situation.

Ibleedburgundy
05-23-2005, 10:30 AM
I'm curious exactly what the army said that was so wrong. If my memory serves me right, the true story came out fairly quickly that Tillman was a victim of friendly fire. The situation was confusing, no doubt, so why does it surprise anyone that it took a week or two to investigate, and learn the truth? There needs to be more concrete evidence that the Army used this situation to boost recruiting before we go with the conspiracy theory. Perhaps the witnesses in their heart of hearts, didn't want to face that Tillman died doing anything but fighting the enemy. Different people deal in different ways, so if a few things were said by guys because they couldn't face the horror, I think we should be a little more understanding here. It was an accident, what's done is done, and what happened afterword is relatively insignificant. Pat Tillman R.I.P.

Axegrinder
05-23-2005, 10:31 AM
And this administration has the nerve to criticize Newsweek.

swheeler
05-23-2005, 12:54 PM
I'm curious exactly what the army said that was so wrong. If my memory serves me right, the true story came out fairly quickly that Tillman was a victim of friendly fire. The situation was confusing, no doubt, so why does it surprise anyone that it took a week or two to investigate, and learn the truth? There needs to be more concrete evidence that the Army used this situation to boost recruiting before we go with the conspiracy theory. Perhaps the witnesses in their heart of hearts, didn't want to face that Tillman died doing anything but fighting the enemy. Different people deal in different ways, so if a few things were said by guys because they couldn't face the horror, I think we should be a little more understanding here. It was an accident, what's done is done, and what happened afterword is relatively insignificant. Pat Tillman R.I.P.

The most obvious (to me) sign that it was intentional is that they constructed a whole story about his death before revealing the truth. It's not like they said "we don't know what happened" and then later "here's what happened". It was more like "this is how he died" and then weeks later, just to the family, "by the way, that's not how he died." That seems wrong.

BurgundyNGold
05-23-2005, 01:20 PM
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.
It seems to me that Army accounts of what actually happened in any AAR (After Action Review) has a tendency to be manufactured to one degree or another. If there is one thing that we'ver learned from Vietnam, Gulf War I, Afghanistan and now Gulf War II, it is that we as civilians, can't rely on anything coming out of a military PAO.

This should serve as a wakeup call to the families of other soliders. If I were the families of the soldiers involved in the Abu Ghraib scandal, I would be just as vocal about those enlisted soldiers getting railroaded while not so much as a butter bar LT has even been investigated.

sherry the moron
06-16-2005, 09:09 AM
> http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-boot16jun16,0,782179.column?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

Axegrinder
08-23-2005, 07:00 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-tillmaninvestigation&prov=ap&type=lgns
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Pentagon's inspector general is reviewing the Army's probe into the friendly fire death of former pro football player Pat Tillman, a spokesman said. Tillman's parents welcomed the decision.

``The other investigations were frauds,'' Tillman's father, Patrick Tillman, told the San Francisco Chronicle.

``People above should have been punished,'' added Mary Tillman, referring to her sons commanding officers.

dukeuch
08-24-2005, 05:37 AM
> http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-boot16jun16,0,782179.column?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

Heck, they fill all the other jobs no US citizen wants, why not fight the wars too? Interesting how they get a choice of two years college or the armed services. Wonder if they would have access to the same financial aid as a US citizen.

dukeuch
08-24-2005, 05:49 AM
The most obvious (to me) sign that it was intentional is that they constructed a whole story about his death before revealing the truth. It's not like they said "we don't know what happened" and then later "here's what happened". It was more like "this is how he died" and then weeks later, just to the family, "by the way, that's not how he died." That seems wrong.

The army way. Just like Jessica Lynch. "She emptied her clip before she was captured, she was raped and beaten in captivity breaking her pelvis, we had to stage a daring rescue in the face of enemy fire to save her". (pssst; she was captured without firing a shot, she broke her pelvis when her humvee flipped, the doctors and nurses comforted her and tended to her wounds, we entered the hospital and "fought off" all those doctors and nurses. Now shut up and go to college.)

This is NOT a diatrabe against Lynch, she did nothing wrong. It just shows that the army is clearly manipulating the truth, or at best making up stories to manufacture heroes.

CNYSkinFan
08-24-2005, 08:40 AM
> http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-boot16jun16,0,782179.column?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

I don't know if anyone bothered to read the crap Sherry posted above3 but it is an opinion piece urging non-citizens to join up in the army to "earn" their citizenship. All this because recruitment levels are at a an all time low.

This to me is an admission that the All-volunteer army is soon coming to an end and some on the right are afraid to have their children drafted for the war they love. And the first place they look is the immigrants.

What is next? Hiring foreign countries to fight for us?

RedskinsDave
08-24-2005, 10:25 AM
I don't see a problem with letting people serve to gain their citizenship. I can't believe that people serve now without getting it.

Your diatribe on those on the right isn't worth commenting on since liberal families are historically WAY behind in sending their kids to the military. Go ahead and ignore that though.

CNYSkinFan
08-24-2005, 10:33 AM
I don't see a problem with letting people serve to gain their citizenship. I can't believe that people serve now without getting it.

Here we agree. I have no problems, in fact I encourage the US to change it's policy on citizenry for any immigrants willing to serve. The subtle difference is the right now know that soon the draft is coming if they can't bolster the enlistment numbers. The irony that they are reversing their policy on immigration to keep their kids from being drafted is delicious.


Your diatribe on those on the right isn't worth commenting on since liberal families are historically WAY behind in sending their kids to the military. Go ahead and ignore that though.

While you ignore the fact the militaryis mostly made up of the underprivledged and a high percentage of minorities. Both groups are large consituent bases for the Democratic party. I am not sure that your statement has any source data too it but I would love to see it.

Ibleedburgundy
08-24-2005, 10:33 AM
I don't see a problem with letting people serve to gain their citizenship. I can't believe that people serve now without getting it.

Your diatribe on those on the right isn't worth commenting on since liberal families are historically WAY behind in sending their kids to the military. Go ahead and ignore that though.


I hope you have some stats to back up that assertion. On the flip side, Liberals value the lives of our men and women in uniform far more than conservatives do. According to liberals, 1800 American lives is too high a price to pay for this war in Iraq but to conservatives it was well worth it.

RedskinsDave
08-24-2005, 10:46 AM
The military is 65% white and 9% hispanic. Those are the crazy poor white people you liberals can't figure out why they vote for the rich-loving GOP. Same for those latinos. I guess when they all join they must change their voting patterns because they certainly support the GOP then.

demographics (http://www.mfrc-dodqol.org/pdffiles/demo2003/SectionIIActiveDutyMembers.pdf)

voting (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html)