Pat Tillman

Post by **SonomaCat** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 10:05 am

An amazing article with great insights about an amazing guy whose life ended way too soon.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f ... ETMNM1.DTL

RyeCat · Post by **RyeCat** » Tue Sep 27, 2005 6:17 pm

I've followed this story since he enlisted and it really disheartens me that his death has become everything he tried so hard NOT be when he was alive.

Thanks for the link.

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 8:16 pm

Oh don't worry. If Tillman begins to have people doubting the system, someone is sure to come out and paint Tillman as some sort of anti-Patriotic loser. Get the Swift Boaters warmed up.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Wed Sep 28, 2005 9:09 pm

iaafan wrote:Oh don't worry. If Tillman begins to have people doubting the system, someone is sure to come out and paint Tillman as some sort of anti-Patriotic loser. Get the Swift Boaters warmed up.

Sadly, I can't disagree. All they'll have to do is point out that he was an atheist, and there will quickly be anti-Pat rallies sponsored by talk radio stations.

lifeloyalsigmsu · Post by **lifeloyalsigmsu** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 1:22 am

iaafan wrote:Oh don't worry. If Tillman begins to have people doubting the system, someone is sure to come out and paint Tillman as some sort of anti-Patriotic loser. Get the Swift Boaters warmed up.

Interesting comment. I don't care what side you're on, no idiot would paint Tillman as such especially with regards to the fact that he was a soldier, passed up big $ to serve in the military, and was a high achiever in what seems like every endeavor he pursued. There's a big difference between Pat Tillman and Cindy Sheehan.

With his desire to serve his country yet his apparent disagreement with the war in Iraq, I found that interesting. My guess from reading that article was that he was against the war in Iraq but was in complete support of the war in Afghanistan. Does that seem to be the case for others who read the article?

lifeloyalsigmsu · Post by **lifeloyalsigmsu** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 1:34 am

Bay Area Cat wrote:
iaafan wrote:Oh don't worry. If Tillman begins to have people doubting the system, someone is sure to come out and paint Tillman as some sort of anti-Patriotic loser. Get the Swift Boaters warmed up.
Sadly, I can't disagree. All they'll have to do is point out that he was an atheist, and there will quickly be anti-Pat rallies sponsored by talk radio stations.

Do you two really think that he'd be denigrated post-humously?

The last time I saw any relatively high profile individual denigrated post-humously was when the democrats turned Jay Wellstone's funeral into a liberal pep rally (albeit, a futile one). You won't see much involvement with the democrats here because they have a tendancy to belittle the military in their subtlest of ways so their getting involved would be a little suspect. The cons certainly would be stupid if they were to paint Tillman as anything but an upstanding American soldier.

The military appears to have done some serious covering up and there will be some heads that roll.

Maybe Michael Newdow will go on a campaign to make him a hero that fellow atheists can look up to.

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 9:43 am

Yes, you're probably right Life. The cons will probably just ignore this completely, which has been theri m.o.. (Like how they've ignored the WMD issue after it was found to not have existed). Unless this builds a bunch of steam, they will only go after the people who are perpetuating it, not Tillman. If Tillman were alive and he was spreading his word against the war, they would likely go after him. As it stands, he can't talk, so he probably isn't perceived as a threat. It would be interesting to find out just how adamently against the war in Iraq Tillman was. Was it upsetting the upper brass? Is that what the coverup was for in the first place? Was it friendly fire or was he shot intentionally?

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:22 am

iaafan wrote:...Was it friendly fire or was he shot intentionally?

Give me a break.

iaa, I'm not sure whether your hatred is directed at Bush, Republicans, conservatives, successful people, and/or wealthy people; regardless, your desire to smear and bash the President whenever possible just hit rock-bottom.

That is a shameful comment, even if it is on a meaningless message board.

Ponycat · Post by **Ponycat** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:23 am

iaafan wrote: Was it upsetting the upper brass? Is that what the coverup was for in the first place? Was it friendly fire or was he shot intentionally?

Emoticon???

Who let Oliver Stone into this thread.

I honestly can't believe that you and BAC believe what you both have just stated.

Anything to make an anti-war statement more emotional.
Give me a break.

WYCAT · Post by **WYCAT** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:30 am

iaafan wrote:Was it upsetting the upper brass? Is that what the coverup was for in the first place? Was it friendly fire or was he shot intentionally?

Wow iaa, I am amazed even you came up with this one. I have completely ignored all of your anti-Bush, Republican, Conservative, etc. hate postings lately but this one I have to respond to.

How blinded are you by your hatred that you can honestly post something like that. I am

for you.

lifeloyalsigmsu · Post by **lifeloyalsigmsu** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:37 am

WYCAT wrote:
iaafan wrote:Was it upsetting the upper brass? Is that what the coverup was for in the first place? Was it friendly fire or was he shot intentionally?
Wow iaa, I am amazed even you came up with this one. I have completely ignored all of your anti-Bush, Republican, Conservative, etc. hate postings lately but this one I have to respond to.

How blinded are you by your hatred that you can honestly post something like that. I am for you.

I really like the new emoticons.

<----That one's my favorite!!

lifeloyalsigmsu · Post by **lifeloyalsigmsu** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:47 am

iaafan wrote:Yes, you're probably right Life. The cons will probably just ignore this completely, which has been theri m.o.. (Like how they've ignored the WMD issue after it was found to not have existed). Unless this builds a bunch of steam, they will only go after the people who are perpetuating it, not Tillman. If Tillman were alive and he was spreading his word against the war, they would likely go after him. As it stands, he can't talk, so he probably isn't perceived as a threat. It would be interesting to find out just how adamently against the war in Iraq Tillman was. Was it upsetting the upper brass? Is that what the coverup was for in the first place? Was it friendly fire or was he shot intentionally?

Well in my opinion, if this happened to any other soldier, we wouldn't be seeing an investigation into this matter (or at least one that is under the scrutiny of the media).

I'm not a fan of the slant that the SFGate often portrays in their columns and I'm not a person with any expertise regarding military strategy.

The article stated that after their Humvee pissed out on them, they were ordered to break apart and move around during the daylight. Tillman's group was ordered (or so it was said) to mobilize in an area that was known to be littered with Al-Quaida operatives.

From the sounds of it, those in the know have been demoted or dishonorably discharged. Those who really want to give a more detailed account seem to have been silenced at this point.

At this point, I don't think there is ANY reason to believe that PT was intentionally killed by "fraticide". I do have to say, however, that with 3 bullets having riddled his forehead, someone was a pretty damn good shot. That seems a little weird but I don't know how far the groups were from each other when the gunfire ensued.

It seems like a major demonstration of incompetency and ineptitude on the part of the commanding officers there (at least at this point).

With all of the censored documents his parents have received, I think it's pretty lousy how the military has handled it at this point.

Hell's Bells · Post by **Hell's Bells** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 11:08 am

WYCAT wrote:
iaafan wrote:Was it upsetting the upper brass? Is that what the coverup was for in the first place? Was it friendly fire or was he shot intentionally?
Wow iaa, I am amazed even you came up with this one. I have completely ignored all of your anti-Bush, Republican, Conservative, etc. hate postings lately but this one I have to respond to.

How blinded are you by your hatred that you can honestly post something like that. I am for you.

You can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink wycat

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 11:36 am

Wow. If you’re going to write, you have to first read. There’s nothing in this post that is bashing anyone. Where do you come up with that? In the real world when somebody dies by gunshot an investigation ensues. In Tillman’s case an investigation did ensue, but it has been shown to be a coverup. Back to the real world, where if there is a coverup another investigation is launched to get to the bottom of why there was a coverup.
So what is there to coverup? Did they just not want anyone to know that Tillman was killed by “friendly” fire? If so, why? But the full gamut of possibilities has got to be looked at or it isn’t an investigation at all, it’s more like Keystone Kops. Which, judging by the tone of your posts, is perhaps exactly what you all want.
In any friendly fire case there is an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the shooting. Do you actually believe that it is impossible for anyone to not shoot one of their own under the cover of battle?
Note My use of the words ‘probably’ and ‘likely’. That means I’m leaving room for something to the contrary. And also note the use of punctuation marks – the one shaped like this (?) denotes asking a question. It doesn’t mean someone is stating an opinion.

Hell's Bells · Post by **Hell's Bells** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 11:40 am

iaafan wrote:Wow. If you’re going to write, you have to first read. There’s nothing in this post that is bashing anyone. Where do you come up with that? In the real world when somebody dies by gunshot an investigation ensues. In Tillman’s case an investigation did ensue, but it has been shown to be a coverup. Back to the real world, where if there is a coverup another investigation is launched to get to the bottom of why there was a coverup.
So what is there to coverup? Did they just not want anyone to know that Tillman was killed by “friendly” fire? If so, why? But the full gamut of possibilities has got to be looked at or it isn’t an investigation at all, it’s more like Keystone Kops. Which, judging by the tone of your posts, is perhaps exactly what you all want.
In any friendly fire case there is an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the shooting. Do you actually believe that it is impossible for anyone to not shoot one of their own under the cover of battle?
Note My use of the words ‘probably’ and ‘likely’. That means I’m leaving room for something to the contrary. And also note the use of punctuation marks – the one shaped like this (?) denotes asking a question. It doesn’t mean someone is stating an opinion.

this = iaafans more intelligible post in about a couple of weeks

------------------------->going to smack board

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 11:58 am

I'm sorry, iaa, but given our knowledge of your political "bent", it's impossible not to take your alleged QUESTION as anything but an ACCUSATION.

If you truly meant it that way, as a legitimate query, then the responses you've received OBVIOUSLY demonstrate how you are "received" here.

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 12:39 pm

Oh I'm pretty aware to how I'm received here and that's too bad, because it's pretty obvious from this last exchange that many of you can't get past that. The world is full of folks with differing opinions and I'm willing to accept, while at the same time debate, anyone's. But, yes, what I said was meant as a legitimate query.

What I don't do is lambaste anyone for not wanting to see Tillman's case go through the process. It seems to be the least we can do for him considering the circumstance (cover-up). For all Pat Tillman did for America, he deserves to have, if possible, the truth regarding his death revealed to his fellow countrymen.

I've seen first hand how cliques form in the military and it isn't a stretch at all to imagine that some of those around Tillman would've disliked him immensely. Then again, it's not hard to imagine that they all agreed with him.

I see your responses as a fear that he was actually killed by someone within his inner circle, just as much as your 'knowledge of my political bent.' I hope that his comrads cared for him and didn't do anything, but the truth needs to be uncovered.

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 12:54 pm

My response was to what I saw as typical from you: Another opening to attack Bush; that stems solely from YOUR historical posts, again as evidenced by the reaction to your comments. You have no one to blame for that reaction but yourself.

If Tillman was INTENTIONALLY killed by fellow U.S. Soldiers, then I sincerely hope that they are found, tried, and convicted. If others have knowingly aided in "covering up" this alleged crime, I hope THEY are found, tried, and convicted as well. My loyalty is to JUSTICE, not to a particular "side" of the issue.

This is similar to how I felt about the idiots that vandalized the NDSU fan bus last Saturday: Wrong is wrong even if "your" side is doing it. Had I been there to witness the vandalism, I'd like to think that I'd have stepped in to stop it; even if it were happening to some griz fans.

Ponycat · Post by **Ponycat** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 1:12 pm

I might be able to believe your explanation if your "query" had other possibilities than Mr. Tillman being killed intentionally.

iaafan · Post by **iaafan** » Thu Sep 29, 2005 1:15 pm

El Gato: I wasn't apologizing and I don't think the reactions I receive are merited. I think the fashion that those reacting is inappropriate, but I'm not calling them names, because their reactions define who they are. If you want to react based on what some said previously and not on what they are saying at this point in time, then I don't know exactly what to say to that. It seems pretty narrow, but that's just me.

I'm glad to hear you feel the same way I do about Tillman and the NDSU bus. I don't know if I like the comparison, but I guess I know where you're trying to go.

Pat Tillman is a great American hero, who risked, and ultimately gave, his life for his country. I don't think it is any special treatment to ask that the gov't investigate the case thoroughly. I'd like to think they do that for all of our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines.

As for this being another opening to attack Bush, even I can't stretch this that far, but give me some time.