Rolling Stone : Propaganda, Wrapped in Lies, Covering up Murder? — Anyone who recalls the Viet Nam war knows about “fragging.” This was the practice of killing an officer or leader who was impossible to work with or who might have been disliked or dangerous or both. This practice, named after a hand grenade technique of murder, is something that will never go away as long as soldiers are heavily armed. This would explain the extremes that the Army went through to cover-up the Tillman death since he was a poster boy for volunteers and patriotism.
Army medical examiners were suspicious about the close proximity of the three bullet holes in Pat Tillman’s forehead and tried without success to get authorities to investigate whether the former NFL player’s death amounted to a crime, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.”The medical evidence did not match up with the, with the scenario as described,” a doctor who examined Tillman’s body after he was killed on the battlefield in Afghanistan in 2004 told investigators.
The doctors — whose names were blacked out — said that the bullet holes were so close together that it appeared the Army Ranger was cut down by an M-16 fired from a mere 10 yards or so away.
previous story about Tillman here.
More coverage here.
Pat Tillman’s death in Afghanistan will always fascinate Americans, but probably most clearly for a reason they won’t understand because accepting it, like acknowledging that we’re going to die, pops the balloon of simplistic pleasantries we use to disguise life itself. For all the reams of rhetoric and frenetic reporting about his demise, there is one word that will pop that balloon and the media is afraid to use it.
Fragging.
Those who write are aware of a need to watch for any term that becomes repeated too much, as if insistently by a child in denial. Peacekeepers. Humanitarian mission. Terrorism. And now, “friendly fire.” Pat Tillman’s death was originally in combat, but now (sleight of hand), we’re told it was “friendly fire.”
http://www.corrupt.org/articles/sacrifice/
I’m sad that people aren’t bold enough to see this. He wanted to fight, his platoon wanted to lag, and so they killed him in the same way they killed American officers in Vietnam: the listless mass turns its weapons on those few who see meaning in the fight (even if I don’t agree with that decision, at least they wanted to get something done in a world of dodgers, slackers, losers, burnouts, fence-sitters, bean-counters, liars, lagabouts, gold brickers, donut engulfers, couch potatoes, whiners, parasites and hipsters).
Regarding comment 12 – “Did anyone investigate to find out if Pat Tillman was an asshole? When I was in the Army I met several people that I thought I would have to shoot first before I went into battle with them…”
Is this somehow supposed to reassure us? Sooth us into thinking that murdering Tillman was appropriate? The “right thing to do?”
What planet do you live on?
Motives?
Pat Tillman was an atheist. Atheists are more hated in America than Muslims. He didn’t fit in with the majority of troops.
Pat Tillman was politically critical of the Bush administration at a time when it was at its height of popularity. The army and its dedicated boot-lickers hate noncomformists.
Pat Tillman was a high achiever, which can spark a lot of jealousy among the mediocrities which make the army a career.
If Pat Tillman was fragged, jealousy and resentment are motives strong enough for that.