Pat Tillman: Hero and Atheist to the End

[subgenius]

"But the latest documents give a different account from a chaplain who debriefed the entire unit days after Tillman was killed.

The chaplain said that O'Neal told him he was hugging the ground at Tillman's side, "crying out to God, help us. And Tillman says to him, 'Would you shut your (expletive) mouth? God's not going to help you; you need to do something for yourself, you sniveling ..."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070726/ap_on_re_us/tillman_friendly_fire_4;_ylt=AkEDuxTy2LRKIRrTjZkYU cYE1vAI

....and disrespected in death by believers.

[MelBrooksfan]

• In his last words moments before he was killed, Tillman snapped at a panicky comrade under fire to shut up and stop "sniveling."

• No evidence at all of enemy fire was found at the scene — no one was hit by enemy fire, nor was any government equipment struck.


No one questioned why these were contradictory?



The chaplain said that O'Neal told him he was hugging the ground at Tillman's side, "crying out to God, help us. And Tillman says to him, 'Would you shut your (expletive) mouth? God's not going to help you; you need to do something for yourself, you sniveling ..."

Is that not the appropriate response? A soldier "hugging the ground" and crying out like that wasn't going to keep anyone alive. Also, the article doesn't mention Tillman's atheism..

[subgenius]

Also, the article doesn't mention Tillman's atheism..
But in light of it, the quote is interesting, and perhaps illustrative of the strength of his convictions.

[MelBrooksfan]

But in light of it, the quote is interesting, and perhaps illustrative of the strength of his convictions.

Perhaps. But, again, I think it has more to do with enforcing discipline on a soldier who has just cracked.

[subgenius]

Perhaps. But, again, I think it has more to do with enforcing discipline on a soldier who has just cracked.
Perhaps.

[Bob Klase]

• In his last words moments before he was killed, Tillman snapped at a panicky comrade under fire to shut up and stop "sniveling."

• No evidence at all of enemy fire was found at the scene — no one was hit by enemy fire, nor was any government equipment struck.

No one questioned why these were contradictory?

Why are they contradictory? Non-enemy fire can't kill you? Or get someone panicky?

[MelBrooksfan]

Why are they contradictory? Non-enemy fire can't kill you? Or get someone panicky?

Ah, my mistake. Did not see the "enemy" in the second bullet.

[SezMe]

I can't help but wonder if his atheism played a role in his death. For example, I doubt the chaplain would explore this possibility. Of all that has been written about Tillman, his atheism is seldom mentioned and the role it might have played has, to my knowledge, never been pursued.

Or I'm being paranoid.

[MelBrooksfan]

I can't help but wonder if his atheism played a role in his death. For example, I doubt the chaplain would explore this possibility. Of all that has been written about Tillman, his atheism is seldom mentioned and the role it might have played has, to my knowledge, never been pursued.

Or I'm being paranoid.

If it were, it'd be a good reason as to why there should be no atheists in foxholes - they'll shoot us.

[Overman]

I think this is something only his family would know....the quote has implications, but people say lots of things...

[Darth Rotor]

I can't help but wonder if his atheism played a role in his death. For example, I doubt the chaplain would explore this possibility. Of all that has been written about Tillman, his atheism is seldom mentioned and the role it might have played has, to my knowledge, never been pursued.

Or I'm being paranoid.
Kinteic energy was what was involved in his death. A blue on blue engagement by a guy classifying the enemy by fire. Tillman and his little group were up hill, in difficult light, basically flanking a hill top position where fire had been coming from. He was shot at due to the gunner down below failing to identify him as a friendly, and his being near where fire had been coming from previously, among other things.

To assert that "his atheism" had anything to do with this smells to high heaven of CT nonsense. The simple tactical and human errors involved do not require a conspiracy. By all accounts, he was well liked, respected, and looked up to by the men in his unit.

Subgenius: I recommend you ask that this post be moved to the CT forum, since that is what you are whinging about here.

DR

[pgwenthold]

Subgenius: I recommend you ask that this post be moved to the CT forum, since that is what you are whinging about here.

DR

WTF?

One person casually throws it out as a question, and all of a sudden it is a "conspiracy thread"?

Dude, you need to gain a little perspective.

[Overman]

I agree, I don't think subgenius was at all saying that he got shot because he was an athiest.

I think subgenius was saying simply that he might be an athiest, and if he was then all those 'no athiests in foxholes' asses can go F themselves...

[SezMe]

Kinteic energy was what was involved in his death. A blue on blue engagement by a guy classifying the enemy by fire. Tillman and his little group were up hill, in difficult light, basically flanking a hill top position where fire had been coming from. He was shot at due to the gunner down below failing to identify him as a friendly, and his being near where fire had been coming from previously, among other things.
Is this scenario consistent with the assessment by the medics that he had three shots tightly gouped in his forehead shot from a distance of less than 10 meters?

No? I didn't think so. Try again Darth.

[Darth Rotor]

WTF?
One person casually throws it out as a question, and all of a sudden it is a "conspiracy thread"?

Dude, you need to gain a little perspective.
Yeah, Dylan Avery is also "just asking questions."

Did you read the article? Did you see this in the OP?
and disrespected in death by believers
Real objective, our Subgenius. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

This OP has agenda written all over it.

If you look into the article, there is an at least partly valid CT angle to this, regarding a cover up.

Pat Tillman got national attention for his enlistment. It is well worth following the trail beyond the flag officers, to find out who among the suits had a vested interest in the information campaign depicting Tillman as (with no substantiation in fact) having fallen while engaged with hostiles, from hostile fire. The speed at which that sound byte hit the airwaves, as part of the PR campaign directed at the American people, needs to be retraced as far as it can.

It may be that only uniformed people, up to that three star, were culpable in the falsehoods surrounding Pat Tillman's death. CYA is a powerful incentive. It may also be that suits were involved, policy makers, and even deciders.
The Pentagon and the Bush administration have been criticized in recent months for lying about the circumstances of Tillman's death. The military initially told the public and the Tillman family that he had been killed by enemy fire. Only weeks later did the Pentagon acknowledge he was gunned down by fellow Rangers.

With questions lingering about how high in the Bush administration the deception reached, Congress is preparing for yet another hearing next week.
Tillman's mother, Mary Tillman, who has long suggested that her son was deliberately killed by his comrades, said she is still looking for answers and looks forward to the congressional hearings next week.

"Nothing is going to bring Pat back. It's about justice for Pat and justice for other soldiers. The nation has been deceived," she said.
I have read too many articles on this. The one that made the most concrete common sense was the summary piece done in SI. The reporter investigated it from a lot of angles, including the human interest side, as well as the guys in the unit.

DR

[Darth Rotor]

Is this scenario consistent with the assessment by the medics that he had three shots tightly gouped in his forehead shot from a distance of less than 10 meters?

No? I didn't think so. Try again Darth.
Ever heard of a Squad Automatic Weapon? (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m249.htm)

It shoots 5.56 NATO standard ball ammo.

What does an M-16 shoot?

Are you ready?

It shoots 5.56 NATO standard ball ammo.

Are you with me so far? This article is trying to equate the use of 5.56mm as proof that an M-16 was the weapon used. SOme field reports point to a SAW as the source of the rounds going up hill.

Primary function: Hand-held combat machine gun

Length: 40.87 inches (103.81 centimeters)
Weight:
With bipod and tools: 15.16 pounds (6.88 kilograms)
200-round box magazine: 6.92 pounds (3.14 kilograms)
30-round magazine: 1.07 pounds (.49 kilograms)
Bore diameter: 5.56mm (.233 inches)
Maximum effective range: 3281 feet (1000 meters) for an area target
Maximum range: 2.23 miles (3.6 kilometers)
Rates of fire:
Cyclic: 725 rounds per minute
Sustained: 85 rounds per minute
Unit Replacement Cost: $4,087

Sorry: ETA. Under ToE, each Army squad has two SAW gunners. Also true in Ranger Squads (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/7-85/figA-10.gif).


Yes, the odds are kinda low for that tight a grouping, but not impossible, and I question their assessment of "range 10m" based on what the troops involved in the incident reported, after an exhaustive series of investigations, as how it happened.

Again, these two accounts are not mutually exclusive. Sounds like before he got hit, he was doing what a good NCO would do, which is to shock a guy who had lost it back into reality. They were in combat.
The documents also shed new light on Tillman's last moments.

It has been widely reported by the AP and others that Spc. Bryan O'Neal, who was at Tillman's side as he was killed, told investigators that Tillman was waving his arms shouting "Cease fire, friendlies, I am Pat (expletive) Tillman, damn it!" again and again.

But the latest documents give a different account from a chaplain who debriefed the entire unit days after Tillman was killed.

The chaplain said that O'Neal told him he was hugging the ground at Tillman's side, "crying out to God, help us. And Tillman says to him, `Would you shut your (expletive) mouth? God's not going to help you; you need to do something for yourself, you sniveling ..."
Those two anecdotes do not rule one another out. Both can have happened in a very short period of time. That's not "a different account."

DR

[Darth Rotor]

Whose words should I believe, sub? Yours, or his?
"Let people find things out about you," Pat told B.J. Alford, his roommate and teammate at Arizona State. "Don't tell them." In Pat's first journal, at age 16, in one of his first entries -- 11 years to the day before he died -- he wrote, I consider myself an atheist, however, in the back of my mind, I wonder if there is something greater. I feel as though I am destined for something "gothic" or the elite. Some state in which I have achieved all that can be achieved. Glory, prestige, peace of mind. Nirvana. Obviously I won't know if my intuition is worth a s--- until I'm dead. Therefore I do not believe in preaching. I do not know the answer so I cannot state my hypothesis as truth. My hypothesis isn't even educated. It's more like a stab.
So, is that strong atheist, weak atheist, or agnostic? To be frank with you, I can't parse it.

Can you?

Other words of his I get:

Pat Tillman on the Iraq War: "This war is [rule 8]ing illegal."

DR

[SezMe]

Are you with me so far?

......

Those two anecdotes do not rule one another out. Both can have happened in a very short period of time. That's not "a different account."

DR, I'm not going to debate weaponry with you because I fully acknowledge your expertise and I would hope you would recognize my abject ignorance of the subject. I'm happy to have the information you have provided as it does shed new light (for me, anyway) on the controversy. I could have assimilated it easier without the snarkiness.

Where in my posts did I use the phrase "a different account"?

[SezMe]

DR, I would assume that Tillman's ideas would have evolved from the time when he was 16 so I would not attach much significance to that quote. His brother said he was an atheist. Period. No, I don't have a link because I don't think it is important enough to pursue unless you want me to go digging.

[Darth Rotor]

DR, I'm not going to debate weaponry with you because I fully acknowledge your expertise and I would hope you would recognize my abject ignorance of the subject. I'm happy to have the information you have provided as it does shed new light (for me, anyway) on the controversy. I could have assimilated it easier without the snarkiness.

Where in my posts did I use the phrase "a different account"?
You didn't, the article quoted, from the OP link Subgenius offered, did.

Hmmm, my mix and match there seems a bit confusing on further review.

My bad.

Also, my bad on the snarky. I have waaaaaaay too much emotion involved on the Tillman case, I probably should not post on it at all.

Sorry.

DR

[pgwenthold]

Whose words should I believe, sub? Yours, or his?

So, is that strong atheist, weak atheist, or agnostic? To be frank with you, I can't parse it.



So 11 years before he died, he considered himself an atheist, albeit with some nagging thoughts.

Perhaps you could find a few of his thoughts when he was adult? I know my beliefs at 27 were very different from when I was 16.

IOW, what does this have to do with ANYTHING?

[Darth Rotor]

DR, I would assume that Tillman's ideas would have evolved from the time when he was 16 so I would not attach much significance to that quote. His brother said he was an atheist. Period. No, I don't have a link because I don't think it is important enough to pursue unless you want me to go digging.
I'll buy it, as a lot of other evidence points to him being very much his own man with his own passion for forming ideals that fit with the mix of things he soaked in and thought about.

Very much a philosopher athlete, which is a bit rare, and a free spirit.

There was some talk that he and Noam Chomsky were corresponding, which had he lived, might have made for some fascinating discussion and articles on the topic of the Iraq war.

DR

[Darth Rotor]

So 11 years before he died, he considered himself an atheist, albeit with some nagging thoughts.

Perhaps you could find a few of his thoughts when he was adult? I know my beliefs at 27 were very different from when I was 16.

IOW, what does this have to do with ANYTHING?
Subgenius comments "Hero and atheist."

The first for sure, the second, considering Sez and your observations, I'll accept.

DR

[Skeptic Ginger]

Not to gross anyone out here, and maybe it's been mentioned, I skimmed the thread, but I heard a soldier who was there describe the scene and Tillman was decapitated. So there is no way he was talking to anyone.

The first hand account went something like this, (!!warning, don't read it if you don't want the scene stuck in your head forever because it is now stuck in mine!!)(I may have some details wrong but not the main part.) They had doubled back or something, I can't remember but the soldier giving the account went in to the details about how they ended up being where they were with the friendly firers being where they were.

Tillman and at least the soldier relating the story were out of their vehicles or in the open on top of the vehicles, (I'm not exactly clear) when they started receiving fire. They realized it was friendly fire. The soldier said Tillman griped something like, "How dare they fire at me. I'm Pat Tillman." It wasn't clear what kind of tone he said it in, joking I'm assuming. Then they took more fire and he heard liquid hitting the ground. He turned and looked and Tillman was decapitated. The liquid was blood hitting the ground. Tillman's body was, if I recall in the back of a truck or something.

Now that I have gone back and read the OP link I guess I'll wait and see. Three shots to the head could have blown the top of his head off instead of the whole head. Soldier hugging the ground, is he just describing them lying prone to take cover? I don't get what the description is saying.

[Skeptic Ginger]

The documents also shed new light on Tillman's last moments.

It has been widely reported by the AP and others that Spc. Bryan O'Neal, who was at Tillman's side as he was killed, told investigators that Tillman was waving his arms shouting "Cease fire, friendlies, I am Pat (expletive) Tillman, damn it!" again and again.

DRThis anecdote fits with the soldier I heard give his account. There wasn't time for the other statement unless it was well before Tillman was shot.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, was Tillman's "shut up" comment before or after he got shot?

[Darth Rotor]

This anecdote fits with the soldier I heard give his account. There wasn't time for the other statement unless it was well before Tillman was shot.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong, was Tillman's "shut up" comment before or after he got shot?
As I read it, before, after the first set of bullets showed up, before he shot the smoke flare and tried to yell loud enough to be heard over gunfire, trying to get his fellow soldier to get a grip on himself.

If I read that incorrectly, OK.

Uh, no, not "decapitated" but "shot in the head" which, of course, sucks in its own special way. Before Tillman was shot, the Afghani who was with them apparently caught a face full of hot lead as well.

Murphy's Laws of Combat: Friendly fire, isn't. :(

DR

[Darth Rotor]

Not to gross anyone out here, and maybe it's been mentioned, I skimmed the thread, but I heard a soldier who was there describe the scene and Tillman was decapitated. So there is no way he was talking to anyone.

The first hand account went something like this, (!!warning, don't read it if you don't want the scene stuck in your head forever because it is now stuck in mine!!)(I may have some details wrong but not the main part.) They had doubled back or something, I can't remember but the soldier giving the account went in to the details about how they ended up being where they were with the friendly firers being where they were.

Tillman and at least the soldier relating the story were out of their vehicles or in the open on top of the vehicles, (I'm not exactly clear) when they started receiving fire. They realized it was friendly fire. The soldier said Tillman griped something like, "How dare they fire at me. I'm Pat Tillman." It wasn't clear what kind of tone he said it in, joking I'm assuming. Then they took more fire and he heard liquid hitting the ground. He turned and looked and Tillman was decapitated. The liquid was blood hitting the ground. Tillman's body was, if I recall in the back of a truck or something.

Now that I have gone back and read the OP link I guess I'll wait and see. Three shots to the head could have blown the top of his head off instead of the whole head. Soldier hugging the ground, is he just describing them lying prone to take cover? I don't get what the description is saying.
I suggest you read the story from Sports Illustrated. It may or may not need a few grains of salt, (I think it does) as the author tends to take the recollections as gospel, but Tillman was a dismount at the time he and a few others arrived at where they eventually became, unwittingly, targets.

Sorry, here is the link to the Smith Article from SI.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/magazine/09/05/tillman0911/
DR

[Skeptic Ginger]

You have to wonder when you hear the words, "chaplain's account" considering how weird the whole Christian soldier thing is in the military these days. Why is all this religion even coming up about the military?

Kauzlarich, now a battalion commanding officer at Fort Riley in Kansas, (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/24/pats-worm-dirt/) further suggested the Tillman family's unhappiness with the findings of past investigations might be because of the absence of a Christian faith in their lives.

In an interview with ESPN.com, Kauzlarich said: "When you die, I mean, there is supposedly a better life, right? Well, if you are an atheist and you don't believe in anything, if you die, what is there to go to? Nothing. You are worm dirt. So for their son to die for nothing, and now he is no more — that is pretty hard to get your head around that. So I don't know how an atheist thinks. I can only imagine that that would be pretty tough."

Asked by ESPN.com whether the Tillmans' religious beliefs are a factor in the ongoing investigation, Kauzlarich said, "I think so. There is not a whole lot of trust in the system or faith in the system [by the Tillmans]. So that is my personal opinion, knowing what I know."

These are NYTs articles about the Air Force, but still disturbing. (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/u/united_states_air_force_academy/index.html?query=CHURCH-STATE%20RELATIONS&field=des&match=exact)Ruling Upholds Air Force on Religious Issue

A federal judge threw out a lawsuit against the Air Force that contended that evangelical Christian values were being illegally pushed on academy cadets.
October 28, 2006 Education News
MORE ON UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY AND: FREEDOM OF RELIGION, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, SUITS AND LITIGATION, CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY, EVANGELICAL MOVEMENT, WEINSTEIN, MIKE, PARKER, JAMES A
NATIONAL DESK
National Briefing | Rockies: Colorado: Air Force Religion Lawsuit Grows

Four Air Force second lieutenants join lawsuit filed by former officer Mikey Weinstein, claiming Air Force Academy officers and cadets illegally impose Christianity on others at academy; meanwhile, Rep Walter B Jones writes to Pres Bush, asking that executive order be issued protecting right of Christian military chaplains to mention Jesus in prayers
November 3, 2005 Education News
MORE ON UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY AND: CHAPLAINS, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, SUITS AND LITIGATION, CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY, EVANGELICAL MOVEMENT, JONES, WALTER B, WEINSTEIN, MIKEY, COLORADO
NATIONAL DESK
National Briefing | Rockies: Colorado: Academy Gets New Superintendent

United States Air Force Academy welcomes new superintendent Lt Gen John F Regni, who succeeds Lt Gen John Rosa as academy faces sexual assault complaints and accusations of religious harassment by evangelical Christian staff members and cadets; photo
October 25, 2005 Education News
MORE ON UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY AND: SEX CRIMES, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, DISCRIMINATION, CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY, EVANGELICAL MOVEMENT, ROSA, JOHN W JR, REGNI, JOHN F
NATIONAL DESK
National Briefing | Rockies: Colorado: Air Force Is Sued Over Religion
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN (NYT)

Air Force Academy graduate Mikey Weinstein files suit in New Mexico against Air Force and acting secretary Pete Geren, claiming Air Force encourages evangelical Christians to proselytize academy cadets; Weinstein says his two sons were subjected to proselytizing when they attended academy
October 7, 2005 Education News
MORE ON UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY AND: FREEDOM OF RELIGION, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY, EVANGELICAL MOVEMENT, WEINSTEIN, MIKEY, GEREN, PETE, NEW MEXICO, COLORADO
EDITORIAL DESK
Times Select Content Obfuscating Intolerance

A Pentagon inquiry's finding of no overt religious discrimination at the Air Force Academy strains credibility.
June 23, 2005 Opinion Editorial
MORE ON UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY AND: ANTI-SEMITISM, EDITORIALS, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, RELIGION AND CHURCHES, DISCRIMINATION, CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY, EVANGELICAL MOVEMENT
NATIONAL DESK
Times Select Content Air Force Academy Staff Found Promoting Religion
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN; WILL SHANLEY CONTRIBUTED REPORTING FROM COLORADO SPRINGS FOR THIS ARTICLE.

But the panel investigating the religious climate at the academy said it found no "overt religious discrimination" - only "insensitivity."
June 23, 2005 Education News
MORE ON UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY AND: HINDUISM, JEWS, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, RELIGION AND CHURCHES, DISCRIMINATION, CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY, ISLAM, EVANGELICAL MOVEMENT
EDITORIAL DESK
Times Select Content Zealots at the Air Force Academy

It will take civilian pressure from President Bush, Congress and taxpayers, to restore the separation of church and state at the Air Force Academy.
June 11, 2005 Opinion Editorial
MORE ON UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY AND: CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY, YALE DIVINITY SCHOOL
NATIONAL DESK
Times Select Content Air Force Academy Leader Admits Religious Intolerance at School

The superintendent of the Air Force Academy acknowledged to leaders of a national Jewish group that religious intolerance permeates the military school.
June 4, 2005 News
MORE ON UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY AND: COLORADO
NATIONAL DESK
Times Select Content Air Force Chaplain Tells Of Academy Proselytizing
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN

A chaplain at the Air Force Academy described a "systemic and pervasive" problem of religious proselytizing at the academy.
May 12, 2005 Education News
MORE ON UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY AND: JEWS, INDIANS, AMERICAN, FREEDOM OF RELIGION, CHAPLAINS, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY, EVANGELICAL MOVEMENT, BUDDHISM, BALDWIN, CHARLES C, MORTON, MELINDA, COLORADO SPRINGS (COLO)
NATIONAL DESK
Times Select Content Religious-Bias Inquiry Is Set at Air Force Academy
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN

There are complaints that evangelical Christians at the Air Force Academy intimidate those on campus who do not hold the same beliefs.
May 5, 2005 Education News
MORE ON UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY AND: COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES, CHRISTIANS AND CHRISTIANITY, EVANGELICAL MOVEMENT, AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE, COLORADO SPRINGS (COLO)
Granted I have been told by members in this forum that the news articles on religion in the military are isolated incidents. So perhaps none of this is that relative.

[subgenius]

I agree, I don't think subgenius was at all saying that he got shot because he was an athiest.

I think subgenius was saying simply that he might be an athiest, and if he was then all those 'no athiests in foxholes' asses can go F themselves...
Pretty much.....nothing else intended.

[Darth Rotor]

You have to wonder when you hear the words, "chaplain's account" considering how weird the whole Christian soldier thing is in the military these days. Why is all this religion even coming up about the military?
I dunno, maybe a lot of soldiers have religion. (Hint: Yes.)
These are NYTs articles about the Air Force, but still disturbing. (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/u/united_states_air_force_academy/index.html?query=CHURCH-STATE%20RELATIONS&field=des&match=exact)Granted I have been told by members in this forum that the news articles on religion in the military are isolated incidents. So perhaps none of this is that relative.
It can be "disturbing" if you have an axe to grind and no respect for other people's beliefs, and it might be disturbing if some people in the Military are forgetting the duties of their offices, but hey, SG, it isn't relative enough to derail this thread.

Care to provide a link to the thread discussion we had a few months back, the one where we discussed Major Weinstein and other matters?

How about you don't spam this thread with that topic, OK? The other discussion was quite fruitful and interesting in its own right.

I say this as a courtesy to subgenius, who I sorta poked in the eye already.

DR

[Skeptic Ginger]

"Having religion" is different from having the officers proselytize. The thread title is, "Pat Tillman: Hero and Atheist to the End". The tags are "atheism, atheist, & pat tillman". The OP mentions, "and disrespected in death by believers." And I posted a reminder of the "worm dirt" incident which the accusation was made that the atheism of Tillman's family was the reason they were angry.

So don't be accusing me of spamming any thread just because you have issues.

[Darth Rotor]

"Having religion" is different from having the officers proselytize. The thread title is, "Pat Tillman: Hero and Atheist to the End". The OP mentions, "and disrespected in death by believers." And I posted a reminder of the "worm dirt" incident which the accusation was made that the atheism of Tillman's family was the reason they were angry.

So don't be accusing me of spamming any thread just because you have issues.
:rolleyes:

DR

[Skeptic Ginger]

So I guess the idea this was fratricide rather than friendly fire is now becoming more credible. First it was in the line of duty, then it was a cover up of a friendly fire accident, including eye witness testimony, (which I guess wasn't as credible as I believed). Now this autopsy showing 3 shots to the head at a distance of about 10 yards. I sort of glossed over this in the OP since the issues of what Tillman said before being shot were the focus of the post.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.

Another account of the AP story: (http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/07/26/national/a162859D06.DTL)Ultimately, the Pentagon did conduct a criminal investigation, and asked Tillman's comrades whether he was disliked by his men and whether they had any reason to believe he was deliberately killed. The Pentagon eventually ruled that Tillman's death at the hands of his comrades was a friendly-fire accident.

The medical examiners' suspicions were outlined in 2,300 pages of testimony released to the AP this week by the Defense Department in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.

Among other information contained in the documents:

_ In his last words moments before he was killed, Tillman snapped at a panicky comrade under fire to shut up and stop "sniveling."

_ Army attorneys sent each other congratulatory e-mails for keeping criminal investigators at bay as the Army conducted an internal friendly-fire investigation that resulted in administrative, or non-criminal, punishments.

_ The three-star general who kept the truth about Tillman's death from his family and the public told investigators some 70 times that he had a bad memory and couldn't recall details of his actions.

_ No evidence at all of enemy fire was found at the scene — no one was hit by enemy fire, nor was any government equipment struck....

...The documents show that a doctor who autopsied Tillman's body was suspicious of the three gunshot wounds to the forehead. The doctor said he took the unusual step of calling the Army's Human Resources Command and was rebuffed. He then asked an official at the Army's Criminal Investigation Division if the CID would consider opening a criminal case.

"He said he talked to his higher headquarters and they had said no," the doctor testified.

Also according to the documents, investigators pressed officers and soldiers on a question Mrs. Tillman has been asking all along.

"Have you, at any time since this incident occurred back on April 22, 2004, have you ever received any information even rumor that Cpl. Tillman was killed by anybody within his own unit intentionally?" an investigator asked then-Capt. Richard Scott.

Scott, and others who were asked, said they were certain the shooting was accidental.

Investigators also asked soldiers and commanders whether Tillman was disliked, whether anyone was jealous of his celebrity, or if he was considered arrogant. They said Tillman was respected, admired and well-liked.10 yards is pretty close. Three strikes, well I guess rapid fire weapons could do that but it's only a guess.

[bigred]

"But the latest documents give a different account from a chaplain who debriefed the entire unit days after Tillman was killed.

The chaplain said that O'Neal told him he was hugging the ground at Tillman's side, "crying out to God, help us. And Tillman says to him, 'Would you shut your (expletive) mouth? God's not going to help you; you need to do something for yourself, you sniveling ..."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070726/ap_on_re_us/tillman_friendly_fire_4;_ylt=AkEDuxTy2LRKIRrTjZkYU cYE1vAI

....and disrespected in death by believers.
:rolleyes:

FYI:
" 'Well, this guy makes disparaging remarks about the fact that we're not Christians, and the reason that we can't put Pat to rest is because we're not Christians," Mary Tillman, Pat's mother, said in an interview with ESPN.com. Mary Tillman casts the family as spiritual, though she said it does not believe in many of the fundamental aspects of organized religion..."

"Spiritual" isn't exactly interchangeable with "atheist" FYI.

[bigred]

You have to wonder when you hear the words, "chaplain's account" considering how weird the whole Christian soldier thing is in the military these days. Why is all this religion even coming up about the military?
lmfao :rolleyes:

It's bad enough that the only thing you appear to know about the military is what you read (and, sadly, automatically believe) in the media - ie very little - but worse is using that as "evidence" for more "there go those evil conservative Christians again" babble. I hope you are very young as such an attitude would then much more sense.

eg and FYI, I knew people at the AF Academy when the stuff you listed was going on. It was WAY exaggerated/overblown by the media.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Did anyone see Rummy's testimony today?

eg and FYI, I knew people at the AF Academy when the stuff you listed was going on. It was WAY exaggerated/overblown by the media.

Paging Dr. LTC Hal Bidlack, ret.! Paging Dr. LTC Hal Bidlack, ret.!

[Skeptic Ginger]

lmfao :rolleyes:

It's bad enough that the only thing you appear to know about the military is what you read (and, sadly, automatically believe) in the media - ie very little - but worse is using that as "evidence" for more "there go those evil conservative Christians again" babble. I hope you are very young as such an attitude would then much more sense.

eg and FYI, I knew people at the AF Academy when the stuff you listed was going on. It was WAY exaggerated/overblown by the media.I've already discussed the Christian invasion of the military and recognize the paper has printed a few sensationalized stories.

It's bad enough that the only thing you appear to know about me is what you read (and, sadly, automatically believe) in a couple of posts - ie very little - but worse is using that as "evidence" for more "there goes skeptigirl with no clue about media versions of reality". I hope you take the time to get to know people a little better before you draw conclusions from such a paucity of evidence.

If there is anything I have posted about consistently here on this forum it is the value of evidence, of checking sources, and of media distortions. Maybe you should check your lack of objectivity about people whose atheism perhaps offends you? Hmmmm?

Now, if you want to discuss my atheism and whether it filters how I see the world, fine. I think any military officer at the level of Kauzlarich (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/24/pats-worm-dirt/) should have known better than to make the worm dirt comment in a public forum (ESPN interview).

The comments by the chaplain here just stir that issue up. But right now, I was trying to refocus this discussion on the fratricide issue which seems to be something akin to an elephant in the room as far as media attention is going so far.

[Darth Rotor]

So I guess the idea this was fratricide rather than friendly fire is now becoming more credible.
SG:

Note on military terminology.

Fratricide is a formal, doctrinal term for what is often called "friendly fire," so I hope you appreciate that they are not two different things. If what you imply (or feel that the analysis shows) is "murder" or "intended homicide," then please use that term, or one like it, which is where your CT seems to be going on this.

The real problem with this analysis by the doctor is that it resolves nothing, but it leaves open some questions. Given the buggering up the Army did on this case in the first place, I don't blame the Tillman family for asking for a more thorough reinvestigation, re examination, exhumation, autopsy, etc.

They have been lied to enough. I don't expect all their questions will be answered, but I don't think they ought to be stiff armed like this. :mad:

DR

[Garrette]

I'm with Darth on the doctor's comments: they resolve nothing.

I would be interested to know on what basis the doc determined "10 yards." If it was solely based on the fact that it's a tight shot group, then he is betraying his ignorance of weaponry.

The only other things I can imagine which would indicate a close range have to do residue and blowback, neither of which would, in my experience with these things, be an issue at ten yards.

ETA: And DR beat me to the "fratricide" clarification. Military usage does not denote intent.

[Darth Rotor]

I'm with Darth on the doctor's comments: they resolve nothing.

I would be interested to know on what basis the doc determined "10 yards." If it was solely based on the fact that it's a tight shot group, then he is betraying his ignorance of weaponry.

The only other things I can imagine which would indicate a close range have to do residue and blowback, neither of which would, in my experience with these things, be an issue at ten yards.

ETA: And DR beat me to the "fratricide" clarification. Military usage does not denote intent.
Good to see you back, Garrette, have missed you lately. :) I agree with you on the ten yards issue, but don't know enough to understand how or why the docs came up with that distance as an answer to much of anything.

I have put a three shot grouping (back when three shot groupings took a very light touch on the trigger, 1978) well within a palm sized at 25 meters, but that was on a range, with an M-16, and I didn't always get that tight of a grouping. It takes some getting used to, that touch.

There is now available the "three shot burst selection" which I only got to try once on a range. To my feel, it made a nice tight grouping of three shots a bit easier, but again, I was on a range. I was not doing any sort of combat shoot. A SAW on a bipod or tripod in full auto, handled by a competent gunner, could keep a pretty tight grouping if shooting within a few hundred yards at the high muzzle velocities characteristic of that round and that weapon.

DR

[Garrette]

Good to see you back, Garrette, have missed you lately. :) Thanks. I've missed posting, but it happens.

May well happen again soon.

I agree with you on the ten yards issue, but don't know enough to understand how or why the docs came up with that distance as an answer to much of anything. I'm no expert, but in my civilian work, I have been involved tangentially with some forensics stuff on shootings. Determining if something was close range was easy. Determining if something was extreme range was a bit harder. Determining where something lay on the spectrum of > a few feet and < max effective range is nigh impossible without other evidence.

I have put a three shot grouping (back when three shot groupings took a very light touch on the trigger, 1978) well within a palm sized at 25 meters, but that was on a range, with an M-16, and I didn't always get that tight of a grouping. It takes some getting used to, that touch.

There is now available the "three shot burst selection" which I only got to try once on a range. To my feel, it made a nice tight grouping of three shots a bit easier, but again, I was on a range. I was not doing any sort of combat shoot. A SAW on a bipod or tripod in full auto, handled by a competent gunner, could keep a pretty tight grouping if shooting within a few hundred yards at the high muzzle velocities characteristic of that round and that weapon. Similar to my experience.

I am a competent shot with rifle and pistol but expert with neither (though I usually qualify as such; I have to tell my non-shooting friends that military labels for that mean little).


I hope to be wrong, but in the absence of any other info, it appears that the doc is stirring the pot simply because he doesn't know his weapons.

[chulbert]

I'm no expert, but in my civilian work, I have been involved tangentially with some forensics stuff on shootings. Determining if something was close range was easy. Determining if something was extreme range was a bit harder. Determining where something lay on the spectrum of > a few feet and < max effective range is nigh impossible without other evidence.

Given a specific weapon and accuracy statistics for soldiers trained in its use, couldn't you make some reasonably useful estimates?

I have difficulty accepting the precise estimates provided by the doctor but what about something like, "There is a 90% chance three shots were inflicted in that pattern from a range of 10m - 60m."

I don't know anything about this stuff and I don't mean to derail the thread into a discussion of forensics. I'm also not trying to promote the claim that Tillman was murdered. I'm just curious. :)

[Garrette]

Given a specific weapon and accuracy statistics for soldiers trained in its use, couldn't you make some reasonably useful estimates?I can't, but I don't know if someone with more expertise can.

I can provide some stats about the M249 SAW:

It has a maximum effective range against a point target of 600 meters.

It has two settings for rates of fire:

Normal: 750 rounds per minute (rpm)
Maximum: 1000 rpm (only supposed to be used if Normal slows down in adverse conditions, e.g., dirt or sand begins to clog it)There are two firing methods taught (sometimes three, but Rapid Fire is just Sustained notched up a bit):

Sustained: 84-100 rpm in bursts of 6-9 rounds with 5 seconds between
Cyclic: 850 rpm continuousUsing the low end rate of 750 rpm to determine how long it takes for 3 rounds to hit a target:

750 / 60 = 12.5 rps

Which means three rounds strike the same target in .24 seconds.

If we use 1000 rpm, the time decreases to .18 seconds.

But that does nothing for determining distance.


I have difficulty accepting the precise estimates provided by the doctor but what about something like, "There is a 90% chance three shots were inflicted in that pattern from a range of 10m - 60m." Without knowing a lot more, I have no idea how to arrive at this (the skill of the gunner, whether Tillman's head was supported or not when shot, the condition of the weapon).

I don't know anything about this stuff and I don't mean to derail the thread into a discussion of forensics. I'm also not trying to promote the claim that Tillman was murdered. I'm just curious. :)That is the extent of my ability to help along these lines. Sorry it's not more.

[bigred]

It's bad enough that the only thing you appear to know about me is what you read (and, sadly, automatically believe) in a couple of posts - ie very little - but worse is using that as "evidence" for more "there goes skeptigirl with no clue about media versions of reality". I hope you take the time to get to know people a little better before you draw conclusions from such a paucity of evidence.Thanks for using my own words; a very nice compliment. Anyway -

The diff you fail to grasp is I was not judging you on the whole, or even regarding your clue about 'media versions of reality' per se; I was judging your knowledge of the military. And when you say things like "how weird the whole Christian soldier thing is in the military these days" or "Why is all this religion even coming up about the military?" - not to mention talking about fratricide w/o even knowing what it is - it's more than reasonable to assume you don't know very much about it. That is my "evidence," and I'll continue to believe that unless you show otherwise.

Congrats on using the word "paucity," though.


If there is anything I have posted about consistently here on this forum it is the value of evidence, of checking sources, and of media distortions. Interesting, given your believe in the stories you mentioned. If you don't believe or seriously doubt them, it wasn't clear to me in your statements, and pardon my misunderstanding.

Maybe you should check your lack of objectivity about people whose atheism perhaps offends you? Hmmmm?:rolleyes: That's one of the most ridiculous things anyone has ever said about me, but you don't know me, so I guess it's reasonable that you would say something so silly.

Atheism itself does not offend me. Atheists, however, often do...but it has nothing to do with their beliefs. But that's for another thread....


Now, if you want to discuss my atheism and whether it filters how I see the world, fine. Again feel free to start up a thread.


right now, I was trying to refocus this discussion on the fratricide issue which seems to be something akin to an elephant in the room as far as media attention is going so far.Yes back to the topic and pardon the sidetrack.

[bigred]

They have been lied to enough. I don't expect all their questions will be answered, but I don't think they ought to be stiff armed like this. :mad:
No, they shouldn't. But the military often isn't about what "should' be done. It (as en entity or meaning those in power) will lie, break regs, and/or put the screws to anyone if any way if it serves their purpose, to include (in fact perhaps most of all) CYA. Yknow those films where they show a mock-up of POWs being held and the enemy going "your country doesn't care about you...." ? I'd go "no sh** sherlock." (that doesn't mean I'd help them though, of course)

[SezMe]

Fratricide is a formal, doctrinal term for what is often called "friendly fire," so I hope you appreciate that they are not two different things.
Boy, that is a news bulletin to me. I thought fratricide was an intentional killing. The first I heard the word was when describing, for example, a soldier rolling a gernade into his commander's tent in 'Nam.

I thought friendly fire was the accidental shooting of one of your own in the heat of battle and fog of war. Or a pilot dropping his load on the wrong location.

If those two terms don't distinguish these two cases, what does?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Thanks for using my own words; a very nice compliment. Anyway -

The diff you fail to grasp...And you were wrong. Period. You don't have a clue what my knowledge is about the military. You drew conclusions about my knowledge from a pittance of posts.

You don't like me assessing you to be less than objective. So if you have preliminary unfounded beliefs about me, don't post them because it is evidence you are less than objective.

[bigred]

:rolleyes: How shocking, you either didn't read or basically ignored my last post and decided instead to just go "you're wrong, period."

Sorry, but

1 - I do in fact have a clue about your knowledge of the military, even if it is minor and based on your "pittance of posts" - still, it is not "unfounded." I explained this quite clearly. But if I'm off feel free to clarify my inaccuracies in that regard if you can.

2 - I couldn't possibly care less if you "assess me to be less than objective." I have also addressed your comment there quite clearly, and oh btw the 2 things aren't related anyway.

[Darth Rotor]

And you were wrong. Period. You don't have a clue what my knowledge is about the military. You drew conclusions about my knowledge from a pittance of posts.

You don't like me assessing you to be less than objective. So if you have preliminary unfounded beliefs about me, don't post them because it is evidence you are less than objective.
FWIW, and apropos of nothing, I was buzzing through SI this weekend and found a quote by this same soldier, the one who the chaplain claimed had told him of Tillmans arse chewing " you snivelling etc." He completely denies and refutes that chaplain's recent account.

Not sure who is bullshirting whom, nor why, but two things come to mind:

How or why does a chaplain breach professional ethics on private communications with a soldier? That's not right.

Why would this soldier, who by most accounts admired Tillman, tell this thing to a chaplain if it were not true?

If he did, why deny it later?

A lot here does not add up, not the least of which is this chaplain's sh** stirring.

DR

[Skeptic Ginger]

The diff you fail to grasp...And you were wrong. Period.

Since you claim I misread something, perhaps you'd like to change this statement.