He was either killed by friendly fire, or the government had him taken out. What is the conspiracy beyond that? I can gu
-
gayfordeniro — 13 years ago(May 06, 2012 05:08 PM)
As said already, the conspiracy was to exploit this death to beat the war drum. Then when it emerged to be friendly fire, it seems people washed their hands clean. I think the movie could've done more to investigate however, particularly by getting the officer that took the fall to point his finger.
I just want to say that posters like 'Charlie Strom' are no better than the government exploiters - he's using this case to prop up his own argument for wide-conspiracy. His claims are rubbish by the way - there are/were many famous people that were taken seriously when voicing their doubts about the legitimacy of the war, for example the people Tillman was reading, Chomsky etc. It would make more sense to kill these people surely. Why go to the effort to purposely kill Tillman, where if he came out against the war he would probably be smeared as 'extreme left' like others anyway. There are many other outrageous premises, such as the US Army has a secret 'friendly fire sniper division' as well.
And the conspiracy for US to attack its WTC, i'm not going to say much, but more of his arguments go like this: there's doubt about some fact (usually due to an official's quote/statement, press coverage - which are always reliable)+ there was intent to go to war = conspiracy. You don't have to consider the idea for very long to see it's outrageous; you need a smart and incredibly well-organised group, including CIA, governemnt officials at multiple levels, multiple governments, multiple nations giving efficient and water-tight information and all beleiving the means are worth the ends. There'd be whistleblowers with the dubious moral grounds - there was with the Tillman case for example. And if this operation occured, why couldn't the same individuals put together even a tiny bit of water tight evidence proving Iraq was in on it?
Charlie Strom et al, go away. -
Calabashe — 13 years ago(May 09, 2012 12:22 AM)
The film was based on Mary Tillman's book,
"Boots on the Ground Before Dusk"
. She led the 'family's' investigations and took them as far as she could. To come up with any solid conclusion would have been speculation and accusation without solid proof.
Pat Sr. has said publicly he believes there are 3 possible scenarios but he never went into detail on camera. I'm guessing the 3 are:- An accidental friendly fire incident.
- A personal case of jealousy and revenge.
- A political assassination.
As a personal friend of Pat's, I never completely let go the third but that's strictly opinion. I'm most disturbed by a missing drone recording of the event.
Noam Chomsky was one of many authors Pat read. You rarely saw him without a book at hand. It is true politically Pat did generally lean Left. IMHO, He and Kevin enlisting proves the patriotism is not the sole property of the Right.
Ret General Kensinger (the fall guy) did participate in the film and told what he knew.
I don't know anything about the other cases you cite so I'll not comment but THX for your thoughts.
-
gayfordeniro — 13 years ago(May 09, 2012 01:30 AM)
A personal friend of Pat's?
Does it anger you to see individuals speculate about these events to meet their agenda, and then push that onto others?
Questions do need answering in this case, but that's as far as we should go (and the documentary has gone). -
Calabashe — 13 years ago(May 09, 2012 02:07 AM)
Does it anger you to see individuals speculate about these events to meet their agenda, and then push that onto others?
Yes it did. It angered the family too. I can safely say that without betraying any trust. There was a time when Mary spoke publicly and privately of 'real Pat' not the media 'super hero' of or the fantasy version Jon Krakaur created in his near fairytale, never mind the recruitment tool the administration/military wanted US to believe.
Pat was a very honest dude. Party because of his poker face - LOL - He really didn't have one. If he told something less than truth - you could tell immediately so he never did, 'cept of course the none-of-your-business questions. Point being Pat was a man who just didn't deserve to be buried in lies.
That was one of the reasons the family agreed to the film and was allowed great say in it's content. It was an honest story of a man more humble than one might suspect regardless of the 'primal animal' let out on the gridiron. It was of the Pat I knew. The family wanted to take back 'real Pat'. I think they did it. -
Charlie_Strom — 15 years ago(September 10, 2010 02:49 AM)
I always wondered what the f#%k are people deluding themselves into protecting? American honor? Patriotism?
A lot of those in denial about 9/11 face the crucial questionif our government has killed others abroad, why wouldnt they sacrifice American lives, here?
Many thought Tillman would be ashamed that his career was politically manipulated. I think he'd be ashamed at the lack of courage by many Americans to not challenge the administration that led them down the tortuous path of war. On this Sept 11th, many should look back and ask themselves Will we allow a Patriot Act again? Allow a Congress to be bullied into a war without proof of WMD, etc. -
Bulletcatcher — 15 years ago(September 13, 2010 05:32 AM)
So, take your stack of internet printouts and go to court.
Good luck with that.
You have zero (0) hard evidence of anything even hinting at US government complicity in the attacks by Al Qaeda. Nothing.
You allude to nothing but circumstantial things. That won't hold water in a court of law.
Clamo, clamatis, omnes clamamus pro glace lactis! -
Charlie_Strom — 15 years ago(February 02, 2011 01:18 AM)
.
"You have zero (0) hard evidence of anything even hinting at US government complicity in the attacks by Al Qaeda. Nothing. "
I think "bulletcatcher" is a very appropriate name.
LOL at the "pride" of the comment. Were going to kill people and have soldiers die for absolutely NOTHING but the wealth of those above us, and i for one, am very, very proud of that.
pathetic. No wonder were in two wars. -
-
shurbanm — 14 years ago(August 13, 2011 06:16 AM)
erm.
you must have missed the last 10 years.
All the supposed hijackers were Saudis.
We invaded Iraq which had NOTHING to do with 911 with the justification of Saddam harboring WMDs.
No WMDs, No 911 involvement.
Does that clarify it for you?
Can take to courtroom and prosecute not defend!
Capice?
Didn't think so -
dmhyche — 15 years ago(September 03, 2010 12:28 PM)
I'm not debating 9/11. I've given up with it. If you want to know for yourself, I would research it and make your own mind up. There's some truth and some beep and it's muddled like that on purpose to make any ideas lose credibility.
Maybe the very bottom guys go to prison, etc., but still, it's mostly low income families. There's no reason you wouldn't go to the military if you were well off. The kids from wealthy backgrounds usually wind up being the generals and high up. Bush was a bum playboy that did NOTHING but get in trouble and he became our president.
Free your mind from the matrix,
http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/joomla/index.php?Itemid=50 -
mulhollandpsycho — 14 years ago(November 18, 2011 10:28 PM)
It was the U.S. Army and officials as high as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld who started the 'hero' line for Pat Tillman. They created the idea that he was killed by enemy fire. That alone qualifies a soldier for 'hero' status. However, Tillman was killed by other U.S. soldiers, a fact that the armed services officials were determined to keep from the Tillman family.
It is not the fact that Pat Tillman was killed while serving in a war that earned him a documentary. It is the conspiracy of government officials to lie to a family and America that has made this situation worthy of a documentary. -
tetrahex — 15 years ago(February 04, 2011 03:06 PM)
problem they want answers, but what answer is there beyond the simple one, some guys got trigger happy and friendly fired him.
while a war is on going they just aren't going to drop everything for one guy.
as for folks pushing 9/11 conspiracies, you've lost the plot. -
Charlie_Strom — 15 years ago(February 17, 2011 05:11 AM)
"as for folks pushing 9/11 conspiracies, you've lost the plot."
Think that Tillman was asking the wrong questions, and was contacting some people regarding why they were in Afghanistan, and he got "friendlied". Then they made him out to be a hero in this - the family wasnt having it. It backfired very badly on conservatives, and the film was going to set the record straight. "some guys got trigger happy is the typical dumb ass beep happens" mentality that runs opinions. Some people hold the Government to a much higher standard, especially when its their family killed.
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
Albert Einstein
