FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Crimes and Cover Ups are Not "Missteps"

The briefing we just received was shamefully unacceptable.

Our family is therefore compelled to continue our pursue the full truth about the circumstances of Pat Tillman’s death and the so-called “missteps” and “deficiencies” of Pat’s unit, the Army, the Department of Defense, and this administration.

The characterization of criminal negligence, professional misconduct, battlefield incompetence, concealment and destruction of evidence, deliberate deception, and conspiracy to deceive, are not “missteps.”

These actions are malfeasance.

This attempt to impose closure by slapping the wrists of a few officers and enlisted men is yet another bureaucratic entrenchment.

The Army continues to deny the family, and the public that pays for the Army with its taxes, access to the original investigation and the sworn statements from that investigation.

His investigation contained the unaltered statements, taken when memories were still fresh, by witnesses to the events surrounding Pat’s death.

We know from subsequent sworn statements that more than one of the original statements was altered, after Captain Scott’s investigation “disappeared.”

This is not a misstep.

It is evidence tampering.

The Army has yet to provide the family with a copy of the original narrative required by Army Regulation to support the award of the Silver Star.

While they admitted today that there were improprieties in the submission of the award, they appear to have intentionally stopped short in every single “misstep” of actual criminal actions.

Submitting fraudulent awards is a crime.

More than one person participating in the construction of a fraudulent award is evidence of a systematic cover-up.

Investigators from the Army claim that Secretary Rumsfeld was not even aware that Pat’s death was friendly fire for almost a month.

Anyone familiar with former Secretary Rumsfeld’s reputation as an unforgiving micromanager must find this claim to be extremely disingenuous.

The Army Regulation on the award of the Silver Star requires a detailed summary, confirmed by witness statements, of the exact circumstances of the event, which precipitates the award.

The award was directed before the unit had even returned from the field for debriefing.

The original draft of the award falsely claimed that Pat was killed by enemy fire, when Pat was not subjected to enemy fire throughout the entire incident.

We know, from sworn statements, that the draft was changed to exclude explicit reference to enemy fire ­ probably as a precautionary legal measure ­ while maintaining the impression that Pat was killed in an intense firefight with the enemy which he was not.

The Army can still not cite a single instance of any Silver Star, before Pat, that was awarded in the case of fratricide, when the subject of the award was never fired upon by the enemy.

No one who knew Pat ever doubted his physical or moral courage.

But the award of the Silver Star appears more than anything to be part of a cynical design to conceal the real events from the family ­ but most especially, from the public ­ while exploiting the death of our beloved Pat as a recruitment poster.

The characterization of this fraudulent award as a list of “deficiencies” has the powerful odor of intentional minimization to a level just below criminal, in a case for which the accumulation of errors and missteps has long past the laws of probability for coincidence.

Emails discovered in the conduct of investigations refer to a “Silver Star Game Plan.” This certainly at least suggests conspiracy.

The entire military, we believe, compelled by the Secretary of Defense’s office, was seeking to accentuate the positive and eliminate the negative, as it was embroiled in a huge tactical setback in Iraq in April 2004, and as the Pentagon was preparing to deal with the public affairs crisis engendered by the about-to-be-revealed horror stories from Abu Ghraib.

This investigation draws conclusions, conclusions that are meant to be implanted in the minds of the American public, that say the wrongdoing flowed from bottom to top.

We base our beliefs on the relentless pattern of the administration of deception, evasion, and spin in the conduct of the entire dual-occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.

We remain convinced that the priority of the Pentagon was to prevent the public knowing that Pat was killed by the military’s highest priority shock infantry unit; and that he was killed by a combination of shoddy leadership and clear violations of the Rules of Engagement, as well as violations of the Law of Land Warfare.

We detail only two major themes in a much larger story.

These themes exemplify the way this case has been handled, and the way it continues to be handled.

These examples show that we are not dealing with “missteps” and “deficiencies.”

There is an overpowering suggestion of violations of law, regulation, and policy that reaches from the vehicle that fired on Pat and took his life to the highest levels of the Pentagon, who ­ with his reputation as a world-class micromanager — was certainly aware of every move made in this case.

In three years of struggling with the Pentagon’s public affairs apparatus, we have never been dealt with honestly.

We will now shift out efforts into Congress, to which we appeal for investigation.

Perhaps subpoenas are necessary to elicit candor and accuracy from the military.

We do not think that Pat’s notoriety ­ about which Pat himself was self-effacing ­ gives him a special qualification for Congressional attention.

But if that notoriety can serve as a catalyst to open dozens of cases ­ many of the families known to us ­ of troops who were killed in Iraq and Afghanistan by fratricide, and whose families, like us, were deceived about the circumstances of these deaths.

The fact is, the malfeasance with regard to this case only happened because of Pat’s notoriety.

The reenactment graphics shown to the press and the public were designed to emphasize enough exculpatory evidence to lower the level of actions during and after Pat’s death below the bar of criminality.

These cases will further establish a pattern ­ now well-known by the American public ­ of spin and deception by the Pentagon and the administration it serves.

Our family has worked hard to stay out of the spotlight.

We have continued to be optimistic that we might receive satisfactory answers from the Pentagon and the Executive Branch.

Now we ask the assistance of Congress.

Human beings continue to be sacrificed on the altar of a dual foreign military occupation.

Thousands of Americans and Afghans, hundreds of US allies, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis lives have been lost and shattered.

The deception surrounding this case was an insult to the family; but more importantly, it primary purpose was to deceive a whole nation.

We say these things with disappointment and sadness for our country.

Nonetheless, we will continue our search for the truth.

The truth is not what we received today.

Once again, we have been used as props in a Pentagon public relations exercise.

 

 

 

More articles by:

Weekend Edition
January 18, 2019
Friday - Sunday
Nicky Reid
Panarchy as Full Spectrum Intersectionality
Jill Richardson
Hollywood’s Fat Shaming is Getting Old
Nyla Ali Khan
A Woman’s Wide Sphere of Influence Within Folklore and Social Practices
Richard Klin
Dial Israel: Amos Oz, 1939-2018
Graham Peebles
A Global Battle of Values and Ideals
David Rovics
Of Triggers and Bullets
Elliot Sperber
Eddie Spaghetti’s Alphabet
January 17, 2019
Stan Cox
That Green Growth at the Heart of the Green New Deal? It’s Malignant
David Schultz
Trump vs the Constitution: Why He Cannot Invoke the Emergencies Act to Build a Wall
Paul Cochrane
Europe’s Strategic Humanitarian Aid: Yemen vs. Syria
Tom Clifford
China: An Ancient Country, Getting Older
Greg Grandin
How Not to Build a “Great, Great Wall”
Ted Rall
Our Pointless, Very American Culture of Shame
John G. Russell
Just Another Brick in the Wall of Lies
Glenn Sacks
LA Teachers Strike: Black Smoke Pouring Out of LAUSD Headquarters
Patrick Walker
Referendum 2020: A Green New Deal vs. Racist, Classist Climate Genocide
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Uniting for a Green New Deal
Matt Johnson
The Wall Already Exists — In Our Hearts and Minds
Jesse Jackson
Trump’s Flailing will get More Desperate and More Dangerous
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party: Part Three
January 16, 2019
Patrick Bond
Jim Yong Kim’s Mixed Messages to the World Bank and the World
John Grant
Joe Biden, Crime Fighter from Hell
Alvaro Huerta
Brief History Notes on Mexican Immigration to the U.S.
Kenneth Surin
A Great Speaker of the UK’s House of Commons
Elizabeth Henderson
Why Sustainable Agriculture Should Support a Green New Deal
Binoy Kampmark
Trump, Bolton and the Syrian Confusion
Jeff Mackler
Trump’s Syria Exit Tweet Provokes Washington Panic
Barbara Nimri Aziz
How Long Can Nepal Blame Others for Its Woes?
Glenn Sacks
LA Teachers’ Strike: When Just One Man Says, “No”
Cesar Chelala
Violence Against Women: A Pandemic No Longer Hidden
Kim C. Domenico
To Make a Vineyard of the Curse: Fate, Fatalism and Freedom
Dave Lindorff
Criminalizing BDS Trashes Free Speech & Association
Thomas Knapp
Now More Than Ever, It’s Clear the FBI Must Go
Binoy Kampmark
Dances of Disinformation: The Partisan Politics of the Integrity Initiative
Andrew Stewart
The Green New Deal Must be Centered on African American and Indigenous Workers to Differentiate Itself From the Democratic Party: Part Two
Edward Curtin
A Gentrified Little Town Goes to Pot
January 15, 2019
Patrick Cockburn
Refugees Are in the English Channel Because of Western Interventions in the Middle East
Howard Lisnoff
The Faux Political System by the Numbers
Lawrence Davidson
Amos Oz and the Real Israel
John W. Whitehead
Beware the Emergency State
John Laforge
Loudmouths against Nuclear Lawlessness
Myles Hoenig
Labor in the Age of Trump
Jeff Cohen
Mainstream Media Bias on 2020 Democratic Race Already in High Gear
Dean Baker
Will Paying for Kidneys Reduce the Transplant Wait List?
George Ochenski
Trump’s Wall and the Montana Senate’s Theater of the Absurd
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail