Sunday, August 05, 2007



Friendly fire is commonly understood to mean the accidental death of a U. S. soldier through weapons fired by U.S. or allied troops. (See this definition.) The facts in the Tillman case make friendly fire highly unlikely. He died from three bullet holes grouped together in his forehead, fired from a M-16 that was no more than ten yards away.

Three bullet holes. In the forehead. From a M-16. That was ten yards away.

That's not "friendly fire." That's murder.

here for the rest.

So I've been alternately fascinated and outraged by the Pat Tillman story from the beginning. At first, I was simply saddened that this extraordinarily patriotic former NFL star turned Army Ranger was heroically killed in a war that has done nothing to capture or kill Osama bin Laden and everything to enrage Islamic populations and create more terrorists. Then when I found out it was "friendly fire," I was saddened further still. Then the outrage began. The news broke that the heroic aspect was completely fabricated by the Pentagon, and that the "friendly fire" angle was suppressed.
Psy-ops, I suppose, directed at the homeland, rather than the enemy. Then it became really fascinating: it turned out that Tillman was a Noam Chomsky fan, and had grown bitter with the Bush administration's handling of the war on terrorism. The invasion of Iraq was "so fucking illegal," Tillman is reported to have said.

Now it turns out that it wasn't "friendly fire." Tillman was murdered, and the Pentagon has lied about it for years now. Indeed, when I first heard about this on Coast to Coast last Sunday night, the weekend guy speculated that Tillman was murdered for his atheist views. But just a few nights later, the regular host interviewed a guy who asserted that Tillman was executed because top brass feared he would come back to the US and become a very persuasive anti-war activist. Indeed, this execution speculation originally comes from former General Wesley Clark on Olbermann's MSNBC show.

Even after all the outrageous bullshit we've endured these last six years or so, it's hard to believe that the Pentagon would execute an Army Ranger because they feared his ability to mold US public opinion after he was out of the service. But they've covered up his murder.


Right now, this is the only theory that fits.

UPDATE: So I've watched the Clark interview a couple of times and I think the guy interviewed on Coast to Coast got it wrong. Clark was only saying that the top brass ordered the cover-up, not the murder. Nonetheless, Tillman was murdered, and it appears that the entire military command structure, from battlefield to Washington, was in on keeping it hushed up. Why the hell was it so important to keep his murder a secret? Execution remains an intriguing theory.