Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

The Tillman Scandal

By Greg Mitchell, Editor & Publisher. Posted May 25, 2005.


In the week after Newsweek's retraction, where is the comparable outrage over the military's cover-up of the 'friendly fire' death of Pat Tillman? And where is a Scott McClellan lecture on ethics and credibility?
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Where, in the week after the Great Newsweek Error, is the comparable outrage in the press, in the blogosphere, and at the White House over the military's outright lying in the coverup of the death of former NFL star Pat Tillman? Where are the calls for apologies to the public and the firing of those responsible? Who is demanding that the Pentagon's word should never be trusted unless backed up by numerous named and credible sources?

Where is a Scott McClellan lecture on ethics and credibility?

The Tillman scandal is back in the news thanks not to the military coming clean but because of a newspaper account. Ironically, the newspaper in question, The Washington Post -- which has taken the lead on this story since last December -- is corporate big brother to Newsweek.

The Post's Josh White reported this week that Tillman's parents are now ripping the Army, saying that the military's investigations into their son's 2004 "friendly fire" death in Afghanistan was a sham based on "lies" and that the Army cover-up made it harder for them to deal with their loss. They are speaking out now because they have finally had a chance to look at the full records of the military probe.

"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," White reported.

While military officials' lying to the parents have gained wide publicity in the past two days, hardly anyone has mentioned that they also lied to the public and to the press, which dutifully carried one report after another based on the Pentagon's spin. It had happened many times before, as in the Jessica Lynch incident.

Tillman was killed in a barrage of gunfire from his own men, mistaken for the enemy on a hillside near the Pakistan border. "Immediately," the Post reported, "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." Tillman posthumously received the Silver Star for his "actions."

The latest military investigation, exposed by the 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."

Patrick Tillman Sr., the father -- a lawyer, as it happens -- said he 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," he told the Post. "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."

"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."

Mary Tillman, the mother, complained to the Post that the government used her son for weeks after his death. 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.

Newsweek made a bad mistake in its recent report on Koran abuse at Guantanamo. But it was a mistake, not outright lying. Yet the same critics who blasted the magazine -- and the media in general -- are not demanding that same contrition or penalties for anyone in the military.

One Newsweek critic after another has asked in the past week that the media come up with just one case where they erred on the side of making the military look good, not bad. One hopes the Tillman example takes care of that request, though there are, of course, many others.

It is worth looking back at how Steve Coll of the Washington Post last December described the early weeks of the Pentagon spin on Tillman:

"Just days after Pat Tillman died from friendly fire on a desolate ridge in southeastern Afghanistan," Coll wrote, "the U.S. Army Special Operations Command released a brief account of his last moments.

"The April 30, 2004, statement awarded Tillman a posthumous Silver Star for combat valor and described how a section of his Ranger platoon came under attack.

"'He ordered his team to dismount and then maneuvered the Rangers up a hill near the enemy's location,' the release said. 'As they crested the hill, Tillman directed his team into firing positions and personally provided suppressive fire. ... Tillman's voice was heard issuing commands to take the fight to the enemy forces.'

"It was a stirring tale and fitting eulogy for the Army's most famous volunteer in the war on terrorism, a charismatic former pro football star whose reticence, courage and handsome beret-draped face captured for many Americans the best aspects of the country's post-Sept. 11 character.

"It was also a distorted and incomplete narrative, according to dozens of internal Army documents obtained by The Washington Post that describe Tillman's death by fratricide after a chain of botched communications, a misguided order to divide his platoon over the objection of its leader and undisciplined firing by fellow Rangers.

"The Army's public release made no mention of friendly fire, even though at the time it was issued, investigators in Afghanistan had already taken at least 14 sworn statements from Tillman's platoon members that made clear the true causes of his death.

"But the Army's published account not only withheld all evidence of fratricide, but also exaggerated Tillman's role and stripped his actions of their context. ... The Army's April 30 news release was just one episode in a broader Army effort to manage the uncomfortable facts of Pat Tillman's death, according to internal records and interviews."

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Greg Mitchell (gmitchell@editorandpublisher.com) is the editor of E&P and the author of seven books on history and politics.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Media and Technology! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Thank goodness the truth is being seen!
Posted by: Iamnotafruittree on May 25, 2005 9:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People. The big news is that THE MILITARY IS BASED ON LIES! I was a military wife (invisible) for 20 years. I spent the whole experience watching the web of lies that surrounds the whole organization to be mind numbing! Absoultly NOTHING the military says or does is even close to the truth. It is their policy. If they did not lie then everyone would know that the majority of the men in uniform are gay, alcoholic, drug addicted pathological liars who just want to control, kill, devalue, rape and then call themselves heros. The medals that are given, well they need someone high up to write a report that would make Hollwood blush! Isn't it nice to know that these are the people who are suppose to be saving us from evil? Mother Nature has a funny way of showing us the truth when we need it the most. I am so sorry about Tillman. He did not know. He was brainwashed by all the lies! But his spirit will not let go. He knew more than you think or his parents would not be on the rampage! His life was not wasted! This man was loved and that love will change the world of the military for the better!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well, what did you expect?
Posted by: dennyduke@earthlink.net on May 25, 2005 10:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey, these guys create reality, past, present, & future. What they say is, is. Where's the problem?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Well, what did you expect? Posted by: tyranny704
More on the Tillman scandal
Posted by: dearkitty on May 25, 2005 3:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
See here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Do they know what they are asking?
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on May 26, 2005 3:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can anyone give an example where the media has been as mistaken in favour of the military as the Newsweek article was mistaken against it?

Well, I think most of us would shout "WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!" first. How long did the mainstream media treat that lie like a sacred truth? Or the constant assurances that the violence would soon decline-- such as if we could only capture Saddam. What about how expensive military actions *wouldn't* be? Or Chilabi being treated as a reliable source.
And then there's Jessica Lynch who was getting VIP treatment at the hospital for her vehicular accident injuries... whose rescue was staged for cameras.

What about the total lack of mainstream media attention to allegations of agent orange and mustard gas being unleashed against Fallujah?

The audience is pro-troops, therefore the coverage is pro-troops. Problems, when revealled, are always attributed to a 'few bad apples'.

Errors of ommission. Errors made by not answering questions fully, or never asking the questions. Errors by reporting lies as facts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

to answer the first question
Posted by: transwr on May 26, 2005 6:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Duh! Having been born before yesterday I already regard statements of the military with the utmost skepticism.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

clinker
Posted by: cottontail on May 26, 2005 8:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It seems the "leadership" sets the moral tone for the country. As this so-called leadership is setting records for lying, it is little wonder even the dummies are catching on. They lie and the lap dogs in the media swear to it. How can we believe anything this administration tells us?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: clinker Posted by: royrogers
Salvation of America?
Posted by: royrogers on May 26, 2005 12:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It will be interesting to see how this develops.


http://www.warcrimestrial.us/charges.php

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What's the big dear with Pat Tillman?
Posted by: Nellymae on May 27, 2005 8:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Personally, what's the big deal with Pat Tillman? I think we should be outraged by ALL the deaths of soldiers who have been brainwashed to believe in this war by the Bush Gang. Of course it's necessary to uncloak the military's lies and reveal the truth about Tillman's death, but, after all, he did sign up to go there. How many other deaths in the current wars have been from friendly fire? I understand it's rather common. I see no reason to extol Pat Tillman any more than any of the other troops who are fighting Bush's oil war.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement