Max Boot: lie to the American people -- it is good for them!

The senior senator and likely candidate for Pres. must have had some interesting thoughts, when he found out he'd presided at a mass enshrinement of a myth, weeks after the Army knew the truth.

Has anyone asked, when did the chain of command find it convenient to inform him? Mr. Boot recommends chaising a falsified Silver Star citation with a medal for cooking the whopper up? Will Sen. John be facing Gen. McChrystal in the confirmation proceedings? That could make for an interesting moment.

To protect the 'hail of enemy gunfire' lie, the liars had to be protected; possibly the same officers who'd refused to reset a botched mission, ordered the patrol to split up, and who'd falsified battalion records, a serious breach. Tillman's platoon LT, injured/out of action in the same incident while leading from the front, took the fall for unworthy commanders. Pat's journal disappeared- a call not made in the 'fog of battle'.

Mr. Boot's not disturbed that the Army seems to have had some 'skill' in its method of 'investigation.' For him, it's OK- commendable, even a duty- to avoid telling the family and country that heroic volunteers often die badly in war? Pat's mom should be proud that her son's death could serve the kind of public lie he rejected in life?

Lying your way out of a PR problem is a bit like bribing a cop on a DUI ticket. It maybe solves the immediate problem. But it lets a dangerous violation slide, while corrupting the system. I found it a sad reflection on war reporting, when it was left to Sports Illustrated and the San Francisco press to set the record straight.

He's rationalizing, but the actual propaganda that drives us into wars that cause the need for such crass rationales is much more subtle... to avoid breaking federal laws that prohibit propagandizing American citizens (Not that it ever stopped Dougie Feith's Pentagon working group, OSP).

Example: The Taliban = al Qaeda Trope http://trunc.it/b8kw Al-Qaeda Seen as Shaken in Pakistan.

Note how they immediately move to discuss the Taliban despite AQ prominent in the Headline. Just like the "Vietnam Massacres" that allegedly occurred (but in actuality, there's ZERO verification) where they immediately move to a discussion of what happened in Cambodia and Laos.

I sent this letter to the NYT today and hopefully Senator Webb will read the email his staffer said he would print out for him today:
June 1st 2009

New York Times Editorial Board,

I was surprised that your editorial today, “Questions for General McChrystal,” did not mention General McChrystal’s role in the aftermath of Pat Tillman’s fratricide.

I’ve been corresponding with Thom Shanker, your NYT Pentagon correspondent, since last Wednesday in reference to his May 26th article “Nomination of US Afghan Commander Revives Questions in Tillman’s Case.” Last Thursday, I FedExed my 100 page document to him detailing new disclosures of General McChrystal’s central role in the whitewash of Tillman’s death.

However, Thom Shanker says there will not be a follow-up article prior to the hearing (He's going to see what tomorrow's hearing brings up). However, I think the NYT editorial board would find it useful to speak with him and get a copy of the document before tomorrow’s June 2nd confirmation hearing of General McChrystal before the Senate Armed Services Committee (or read my letters below and attachments).

If speaking to Thom would violate the separation of the editorial staff from the reporting staff, you can read my May 27th letter to Thom Shanker and my letter to Senator Webb. If you would like more detailed information, I will send another email with "attachments” with some of the documents in the package I sent to Thom Shanker.

Feel free to contact me with any questions. Unfortunately, I won’t be able to respond to emails until after 9 PM since my home computer is out (until my wife gets home with her laptop). But, I’ll be home most of the day if you wish to call my home phone.

Sincerely,

David Parish

SSG Co F,(Ranger) 425th Inf. 1983 -1991

********

May 27th 2009

Thom Shanker,

I just read your May 26th article, “Nomination of U.S. Afghan Commander Revives Questions in Tillman’s Case.”

This past week I’ve been working on a long letter to Senator James Webb. I wrote that Congress and the senior leadership of the Army have shielded General McChrystal from close scrutiny and protected him from punishment. I reviewed and critiqued Senator Webb’s Armed Services Committee review, General Wallace’s review, and Congressman Waxman’s House Oversight & Reform Committee investigation.

I’d like to send you a copy of my letter. My letter discusses in some detail every point raised in your article. In addition, I’ve uncovered new information about the Tillman case not mentioned at all in your article.

Here’s a preview of some of the information (without details or documentation):

1. Senator Webb did a secret “thorough review” last year of the aftermath of the Tillman fratricide at the request of Chairman Carl Levin for the Senate Armed Service Committee. (In retrospect, I realize this was part of the vetting process for McChrystal’s confirmation last year as Director of the Joint Staff). Webb mentioned this review May 27th 2008 on the Diane Rhem NPR radio show (about 40 minutes into show). When I tried to follow up, Webb’s Military Affairs aide, Gordon Peterson, stonewalled me and referred me to Gary Leeling 202-224-9339 (legal counsel for Senator Levin)

2.) Congressman Waxman “invited” McChrystal to testify on August 1st 2007. The Committee permited McChrystal to “decline” to appear at the hearing despite his key role in notifying senior leadership, writing the misleading P4 memo, and approving the fraudulent Silver Star. And the Committee never interviewed McChrystal during the next year until their report was issued. .

3.) General Kensinger was blamed for failing to notify the family because he supposedly had the “administrative” responsibility to do so. Yet, if you look at “Appendix D: Casualty Reporting & Next of Kin Notification Process” in the IG report, the flowchart clearly shows that McChrystal had that responsibility (and it’s noted both he and his Chief of Staff failed to make that notification despite knowing about fratricide NLT April 25th.

4). There was nothing “potential” about Tillman’s friendly fire death. Most of the troops on the ground knew immediately what had happened. On the 23rd word was passed up “70% sure” to Nixon. But, if you look at the IG report’s “Appendix B: Chronology,” its noted that LTC Bailey tells COL Nixon of potential fratricide on the 23rd yet Nixon supposedly only tells McChrystal of Tillman’s “death” (no mention of fratricide). How is that possible? And then supposedly McChrystal tells General Abizaid only of Tillman’s death. It looks as though Abizaid wasn’t being truthful when he testified before Congress about when he learned about fratricide.

5.) And on the 24th, the initial investigating officer CPT Scott passed on verbal confirmation (“I’m certain, I’m sure”) to LTC Bailey, who then called COL Nixon (McChrystal was next in the chain of command). The Army knew of confirmed FF two days after Tillman’s death!

6.) McChrystal is praised for his “timely” P4 memo to alert his superiors on the 29th. There was nothing timely about it. Even if you accept his own testimony at face value, he knew about friendly fire on the 23rd, 24th, or 25th. Yet he didn’t send out his P4 until the 29th? How is waiting four to six days “timely”?

7.) No one seems to have carefully read McChrystal’s P4 memo. The contents are damning. For example, He says “IF the circumstances of CPL Tillman’s death become public.” Not when, IF.

Anyhow, I believe you will find it worth your time to read through my letter.

Could send me your e-mail address? Then, I could simply send my documents as “attachments” to an email. Could you also give me a mailing address? (I’ll Fed Ex a hardcopy of letter tomorrow).

If you have any further questions, I can be reached at my email: . I can also be contacted at my home phone, . (Unfortunately, I’m a dinosaur who still doesn’t have a cell phone, so that option is out!) I’ll be home tomorrow in the afternoon and evening.

Sincerely,

David Parish

**********************************************************

"They ought to make a movie about this. Mr. Smith comes to Washington.” “Yeah, I called my pa last night and he says, “Judd boy, you been up there with them muck-a-mucks two days, now. Did they teach you how to lie yet?”
-- James Webb, “A Country Such As This” (1983)

Memorial Day 2009

Senator James Webb,

Five years ago on Memorial Day weekend, five weeks after he was killed in Afghanistan, Pat Tillman’s parents were finally told their son was “probably” killed by friendly fire.

This Memorial Day weekend, the Senate Armed Services Committee has scheduled General Stanley McChrystal’s confirmation hearing for June 2nd. Chairman Carl Levin and Senator John McCain don’t foresee any problem with his confirmation.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said, "We feel terrible for what the Tillman family went through, but this matter has been investigated thoroughly by the Pentagon, by the Congress, by outside experts, and all of them have come to the same conclusion: that there was no wrongdoing by Gen. McChrystal."

However, Pat Tillman’s parents believe McChrystal played a central role in the cover-up of their son’s fratricide. Pat Tillman Sr. said, "I do believe that guy participated in a falsified homicide investigation.” Mary Tillman said, "It is imperative that Lt. General McChrystal be scrutinized carefully during the Senate hearings."

Mary Tillman has harshly criticized the actions of General McChrystal, especially regarding his “Personal For” (P4) memo sent on April 29th 2004 (ostensibly to alert President Bush against making embarrassing public statements about Tillman’s heroism or his Silver Star). In her book “Boots on the Ground by Dusk,” Mary wrote:

“Not only is he [McChrystal] lying about the circumstances surrounding Pat’s death, … he is proposing false language for the Silver Star narrative. … His statement [P4 memo] indicates that no one had any intention of telling us, or the public, that Pat was killed by fratricide unless forced to do so.”

And shortly after General Wallace’s findings were released in July 2007, Mary said:

"That memo [P4] is damming as hell. And yet, nothing happens to [McChrystal]. He is writing fraudulent language in that memo. He is giving examples of how they can script the Silver Star award, even though Pat was killed by fratricide. And he is saying we need to keep our leadership abreast of things so they don't embarrass themselves, IF the circumstances of Pat's death should become public … “

“He should be saying 'We're going to have to put a hold to the Silver Star and we're going to have to notify the family [of suspected friendly fire].' That is what he would say if he was innocent, but he is not. He is trying to find a way that they can continue this false, elaborate story of theirs. And the fact that he is off the hook is atrocious.”

I believe the Senate Armed Services Committee should postpone General McChrystal’s confirmation and take a closer look at McChrystal’s central role in the Army’s handling of Pat Tillman’s fratricide.

Five years ago, Pat Tillman’s family were handed a tarnished Silver Star. It will be a travesty of justice if McChrystal is confirmed by the Senate, promoted to the Army’s highest rank, and handed his fourth star.

. . .

Congress and the senior leadership of the Army have shielded General McChrystal from close scrutiny and protected him from punishment for his central role in orchestrating the cover-up of Pat Tillman’s fratricide:

Last year, the Senate Armed Services Committee conducted a secret review of General McChrystal’s role in the Army’s handling of the Tillman fratricide. On May 15th 2008 the Senate Armed Services Committee met in “executive” (closed) session to consider McChrystal’s nomination. On May 22th 2008, General McChrystal was unanimously confirmed by the Committee and promoted to Director of the Joint Staff.

Last year, on May 27th 2008, I spoke briefly with Senator Webb on NPR radio during “The Diane Rhem Show” (40:56). Webb spoke of a recent review of the handling of the Tillman fratricide:

“I think what happened in the aftermath of Pat Tillman’s death was really tragic.

I just went through a fairly thorough review of that process at the request of the Chairman of the [Senate] Armed Services Committee [Senator Levin] and the bottom ...

I talked to his father years ago when my book ‘Born-Fighting’ came out.

What we do know, this is what I think is so disturbing, is that the Army knew that this was a friendly fire incident fairly quickly, they did not tell the family, they allowed a ceremony to go forward which implied otherwise, and his own brother, which had served with him, it was kept from him until the ceremony took place.

I’m not sure where responsibility for that decision really lies, in terms of the chain of command, how it was handled publicly, but it was really wrong.

Someone like me has to have a tremendous amount of respect for what Pat Tillman did in terms of stepping forward among other things. You cannot help but still feel angry about how his death was used.”

I was surprised to learn of Senator Webb’s review. Although I was familiar with Congressman Henry Waxman’s (House Oversight & Reform Committee) hearings on the Tillman fratricide, I was unaware that any sort of Senate review had also been conducted.

When I attempted to follow up to find out more about the Senate review, I was stonewalled by Senator Webb’s Military Legislative Aide Gordon Peterson:

“Regarding your questions about the radio interview, I’m not in a position to elaborate. I did not participate in the review that Senator Webb mentioned and have no information to provide to you. The senator’s involvement occurred in his capacity as a member of the Senate Committee on Armed Services. I checked with Senator Webb, and he has nothing more to add to what he said last week. If you have any additional questions you should contact a representative for the Committee -- Gary Leeling [Lead Counsel for the Personnel Subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee] , 202 224-9339. He is out of the office until next week.”

To my regret, I never followed up with Gary Leeling (Legal Counsel for Senator Carl Levin). I was very busy with life (and had just spent far too much time on the Tillman case) and figured I was just getting blown off.

A year later, after General McChrystal’s nomination as the new commander of the Afghanistan War, I finally realized Senator Webb’s review was for a previous Senate confirmation of General McChrystal. On May 15th 2008 the Senate Armed Services Committee met in “executive” (closed) session to consider McChrystal’s promotion. On May 22th 2008 General McChrystal was unanimously confirmed by the Committee and promoted to Director of the Joint Staff.

. . .

I share your anger about how Pat Tillman’s death was used. But, I don’t understand why you were unable to determine “where responsibility for that decision really lies” to cover up Tillman’s fratricide. I doubt you actually conducted a “fairly thorough review” of General McChrystal’s role. General McChrystal was the central figure in the Army’s cover up of Tillman’s friendly fire death. McChrystal received confirmation of Tillman’s fratricide within two days, had the responsibility to tell the family, made the decision not to tell the family about fratricide, and he approved the “misleading” Silver Star award.

. . .

On July 31st 2007, Secretary of the Army Pete Geren presented the findings of General William Wallace’s review of the previous Tillman investigations. General McChrystal received no reprimand for his role in the handling of the Tillman fratricide. Instead, General Wallace singled out General Kensinger as the scapegoat responsible for the public believing the Army covered up the Tillman fratricide.

However, Secretary Geren and General Cody’s defense of McChrystal doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. General McChrystal was guilty of the same charges for which Kensinger was scapegoated! That is, General McChrystal was responsible to “inform the family about friendly fire,” failed to “inform the family about friendly fire in a timely manner,” failed “to inform the acting Secretary of the Army [his chain of command] of the fratricide investigation,” and (arguably) made “false official statements.”

[NOTE: see “General Wallace’s Review of Tillman Fratricide” attachment for details]

. . .

During 2007, Congressman Waxman’s House Oversight & Reform Committee conducted an investigation and held two hearings on the Tillman fratricide. However, Congressman Waxman’s Committee appeared to conduct a half-hearted investigation.

Chairman Waxman’s decision to narrow the scope of his investigation to only “look up” the chain of command took the focus off General McChrystal. The Committee permitted General McChrystal to “decline” to appear and they never interviewed him later. After raising questions about the Silver Star, they didn’t look into McChrystal’s role in approving the Silver Star with a fraudulent citation, justification and altered witness statements. The Committee never questioned the “timeliness” or misleading contents of General McChrystal’s P4 memo.

[NOTE: see “House Oversight & Reform Committee’s Tillman Fratricide Hearings” for more detail]

. . .

The Senate Armed Services Committee June 2nd confirmation of General McChrystal will be the top layer upon the Army and Congressional cover-ups of Pat Tillman’s death.

During the April 24th 2007 Congressional hearing, Mary said,

“… Congress is supposed to take care of their citizens. … Pat died for this country, and he believed it was a great country that had a system that worked. It is not perfect. No one has ever said that. But there is a system in place to allow for it to work, and your job is to find out what happened to Pat.”

In your 1983 novel, A Country Such As This, Congressman Judd Smith argued: “And no, the military isn’t just fine. The point is, it isn’t corrupt. It’s a system with human failures.”

But when “human failures” systematically extend up every single link in the chain-of-command (to include the Chair of the Joint Chiefs, Army Chief of Staff, and the Secretary of Defense) up to and including the White House, how is this not a corrupt country? Every single institution in this country has failed the Tillman family, including the Army leadership, Congress, White House and the mainstream media.

Perhaps Senator Rowland, in your novel, Something to Die For, hit the nail on the head:

“How lofty it must have been to have burnt with the purity of the Revolution! Before the days of multi-million dollar election campaigns that brought politicians to their knees before the monied temple of the contributors. Before the time of computerized politics that cause them to await the wisdom of those oracles known as pollsters before they spoke. Or maybe it had been trash from the get-go, myths to feed the public.”

* * *

“Across the room … my mother’s father, B.H. Hodges, stares out at me … as he has done in every office I have occupied for more than twenty years. … Defiant he was, and tragic too. He was a fighter, a lonely champion of lost causes who himself lost everything because of the causes he championed.”

-- James Webb, “A Time to Fight” (2008)

Four decades ago, you were drawn into the Herrod case. A Marine patrol was accused of killing sixteen Vietnam Villagers. Herrod, the patrol leader and veteran of five months, had been found not guilty. Yet Sam Green, a black eighteen year old with eleven days in Vietnam had been convicted even though no testimony had been presented that he had actually killed anyone. From Robert Timberg’s “The Nightingale’s Song”:

“The case continued to bedevil Webb …. He wanted to help Green, but wasn’t sure what he could do. … He joined forces, pro bono, … to try to get the conviction overturned in a civilian court. … The secretary [of the Navy] declined to act. … About two weeks later, in August 1975, Webb received a telegram …: TRAGIC CONCLUSION SAM GREEN DESTROYED HIMSELF.”

“He had never met Green, spoken to him only once by phone, but he had committed himself to clearing his name. … He felt helpless, his sense of futility laced with outrage. Isn’t any of this going to come out right? … Green was dead, but Webb couldn’t let the case go. He … filed an appeal … asking that Green’s dishonorable discharge be upgraded to honorable. Webb personally argued the case before the board.”

“In December 1978, eight years after the shootings and three years after Green’s suicide, Webb wrote to Mrs. Green: “At last, Sam’s name is cleared.” He explained that her son’s discharge had been upgraded to a general discharge. … “This is small solace, I know,” wrote Webb, ‘I only regret we were unable to do more for him sooner.”

. . .

I never met Pat Tillman. I never really knew anything about him until a year and a half after his death. But, I’ve taken the cover-ups of his death a bit personally the last few years. Why? I feel a sense of kinship with Pat Tillman. I’m not in his league, but I was an Airborne Ranger and an autodidact and a bit of maverick. And I’ve always had outrage for injustice and rooted for the underdog.

I’ve been bedeviled by the Tillman case. For five years, I haven’t been able to let the case go. I hoped this could be one small cause I might be able to make a difference with all the other shit going on the past few years. It would be nice if this “letter” of mine would make a difference.

. . .

For thirty years your books have dealt with themes of honor, integrity, loyalty, and betrayal. Re-reading your books, I noticed many parallels between your books and the story of Pat Tillman’s death. On April 3, 2008, I sent your office a letter asking you to become an advocate in the Senate for Mary Tillman’s struggle for the truth about her son’s death (I doubt my letter made it past your gatekeeper Gordon Peterson).

I believed you would feel a sense of kinship with Pat Tillman and his family:

The Tillman’s are of Scots-Irish descent. Military service was prevalent and respected in the Tillman family. Mary Tillman’s uncles were at Pearl Harbor, her brother was a Marine, and her father was a Marine during the Korean War. Mary wrote, “From the time I was very little, I was aware of my father’s pride in being a Marine. When I was three years old … I would stand between my parents, feet digging into the soft leather of the big front seat, and sing the entire Marine Corps Hymn at the top of my lungs.”

“Pat Tillman was driven by a core of honesty, integrity, and loyalty. His mother wrote, “Pat was honest and incorruptible; he would be offended and outraged about the actions taken in the aftermath of his death. … Honor, integrity, dignity; those weren’t just adjectives in Pat Tillman’s life; they were his life. Pat Tillman was the embodiment of loyalty and commitment. … He was such a loyal person. He always wanted to do right by the people who mattered to him.”

Similarly, in A Country Such As This, Senator Judd Smith said, “If nothing ever works out all the way, and if all things change, what’s left? Your family and your friends and your values, that’s what’s left. And your duty to them. … They’re the only important things in life. … And that the rest of it might change a million times, be called wrong or right or anything else, but you must never violate your loyalty if you wished to survive the judgment of the ages.”

Five years ago, Pat Tillman’s family were handed a tarnished Silver Star. It will be a travesty of justice if McChrystal is confirmed by the Senate Armed Services Committee, promoted to the Army’s highest rank, and handed his fourth star.

But, perhaps you were right years ago in your novel, “A Sense of Honor,” when CPT Lenahan said, “I guess that’s what the world does to you. It makes you realize that honor and loyalty are traps with no reward.”

. . .

I feel you owe a duty to Pat Tillman and his family. A duty to place a “hold” on General McChrystal’s nomination and stop his confirmation on June 2nd.

Yeah, that could be a lost cause. You’d piss off a lot of people. But, at least you would give Mary Tillman the small solace of knowing there is one man of integrity in the Senate willing to stand as her advocate. Someone willing to “be a lonely champion of lost causes…” Perhaps you need to take a long look at the picture staring at you from your office wall?

You’ve been a hero to me for three decades, since I was a teenager, through my years as an Airborne Ranger LRRP, to the present day as a firefighter. I haven’t always agreed with your positions on the Vietnam War, etc. But I’ve never before doubted your integrity. I’ve always trusted your sense of honor.

I’d like to think that after three years in Congress you haven’t yet learned the lesson your grandmother Hodges asked of you decades ago when you first worked in Washington DC, “Did they teach you how to lie yet?”

Sincerely,

David Parish

. . . but I'd have to say what I've read from him is a mixed bag. He can be very informative, and he can get quite sloppy.

The Commentary piece is neither: it's ideological. In the worst way.

"There may be an element of truth here, but so what?"

Right there, we have a huge problem. "So what?" Truth, Mr. Boot, is a transcendent value. Anyone who feels comfortable twisting or denying it because they think they've figured out a way to make the world better through lies is to be deeply mistrusted.

"In addition to protecting the Army, Tillman’s superior officers were also protecting his own reputation."

Nonsense. Tillman voluntarily gave up a career most guys dream about, and put himself in the way of serious harm. That makes him admirable, even heroic. And that's what his reputation is based on. Not how he died.

"Much better to die at the hands of the enemy, after all, than at the hands of one’s own mates."

This is bizarre. Even if it is "much better," that's not what happened. Boot seems to think that the only way to make the world habitable is to retreat into fantasy.

". . . why inflict the ugly truth on the home front?"

Why? Because it is the truth. Who are you to say that because the truth is ugly it needs to be kept from relatives, friends, fellow-citizens? What could be more disrespectful of all involved?

And then there are the practical considerations. As Petraeus said, in another context, "I don't think we should be afraid of our values we're fighting for, what we stand for. And so indeed we need to embrace them and we need to operationalize them in how we carry out what it is we're doing on the battlefield and everywhere else..."

This is who we are. A republic of free citizens. Free from lies, from manipulation; free to deal with life, even the ugly parts, as men and women.

Talk about hating our freedoms.

This is worth reading:

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2009/05/honor_the_dead_tell_the_truth.html

Lying to the American people pisses them off. It makes for poor strategy.

I remember (correctly I hope) reading an article in Military Affairs long ago. It recounted how a French general was charged with determining how many French soldiers were killed by Allied fire in WWI. He came up with a figure of about 20%. This was not acceptable so he, or his superiors, arbitrarily cut it to 2%, and that became a standard. I think the article further stated the actual rate stays pretty constant at between 15% to 20%.

How else can a General Officer or an Admiral show the courage that is expected daily from the soldier, airman or seaman?

The ability to tell the truth, holding integrity in difficulty, must be an attribute of the metal for becoming this senior an officer.

Failure to hold to it must create a prompt commission termination for the good of the service and benefit to the Nation.

(Jim Webb did ask for the truth. It was a failure by the Army to uphold its trust to Pat Tillman's sacrifice.)

"BK's idealized image of stainless honor in a warrior-general is at odds with the imperial matrix of politics and info/disinfo ops. Consumers of info are the strategic center, in a long war of choices. Misdirection is required."

To a member of the great unwashed mass, me, this statement seems a very clever rationalization for lying to your own people. After all, it is for their own good.

Lying to your own is a bad thing.