Categorical Aperitif

My friend jules sent me a link this morning to firedoglake's post on the new Pat Tillman news released by the AP. I was depressed and horrified at first; the thought that the guy gave up a multi-million-dollar professional sports career to put his life on the line in the hardest, most dangerous form of national service only to be killed in cold blood by his own comrades—and then to have the White House itself participate in the cover-up—plumbs new depths of awfulness.

I try to be a careful reader and thinker, though, so I took a closer look at the AP story. Were they hyperventilating a bit over at firedoglake? They sum up the AP story as follows:

In other words, Pat Tillman was most likely murdered in the field. In cold blood. By other US soldiers.

Well, maybe, but the AP story doesn't say that, nor is it a reasonable inference from what it does say. The key assertions in the AP story are these:

Army medical examiners were suspicious about the close proximity of the three bullet holes in Pat Tillman's forehead and tried without success to get authorities to investigate whether the former NFL player's death amounted to a crime, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

"The medical evidence did not match up with the, with the scenario as described," a doctor who examined Tillman's body after he was killed on the battlefield in Afghanistan in 2004 told investigators.

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.

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.

Elaboration later:

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.

This is worrisome and suspicious, I grant you, but it does not add up to "Pat Tillman was most likely murdered in the field." Given the cover-ups and claims of executive privilege surrounding this story, though—what the hell is the White House's stake in it, anyway?—one can be forgiven for thinking that these new revelations move us significantly further toward the "Pat Tillman was fragged" side of the field.

I'm bothered by something, though: Note how the story moves from "Army medical examiners were suspicious" (plural) to "a doctor...was suspicious" (singular). Well, which is it: was one doctor sounding the foul-play alarm, or more than one?

When I read the story, I was also bothered by "the three bullet holes." I thought, Are they only worried about "the close proximity" of those three? Are those three really significant? I had assumed that Tillman had been hit by more than three bullets. But no; according to CNN's account of his death, "He was hit in the head by three bullets fired by U.S. soldiers who say they mistook him for the enemy." So those three bullets—and their proximity—may well be damn significant. And why the rush to destroy his uniform and body armor after his death?

Tillman's uniform was burned by soldiers after his death. The Army's most recent investigation concludes Tillman's uniform and body armor should have been preserved, but the latest report disputes that it was burned in an attempt to cover anything up.

"Nothing could be further from the truth," concludes the report, which says the soldiers thought they were disposing of a "biohazard."

A biohazard?!?!? Let's see what the WaPo says about that:

The first report about Tillman's death within Army channels -- sent at 4:40 p.m. April 22 -- said that Tillman died in a medical treatment facility after his vehicle came under direct and indirect fire, attributing the gunshot wounds he received to "enemy forces." An investigation was immediately launched, and several documents show that the local chain of command was largely convinced it was fratricide from the beginning.

The next day, Tillman's Ranger body armor was burned because it was covered in blood and was considered a "biohazard." His uniform was also burned. Jones noted that this amounted to the destruction of evidence.

Soldiers reported they burned the evidence because "we knew at the time, based on taking the pictures and walking around it it was a fratricide. . . . We knew in our hearts what had happened, and we weren't going to lie about it. So we weren't thinking about proof or anything."

It was a biohazard simply because it was "covered in blood"? Did Tillman have an exotic disease or acid for blood or something? And it was destroyed because everyone knew it was fraticide, so there was no point in keeping the evidence around? Jeez, this gets screwier the more you look at it.

I still think that firedoglake goes beyond the available evidence, but I can't say that I blame them. At this point, one would be a fool not to suspect bad motives where the Bush Administration is involved—and there are just too many holes in the official stories surrounding Tillman's death for us not to be suspicious when an Army medical examiner smells deliberate fratricide.

I fear that we'd best get used to these new depths of awfulness. Something tells me they're going to get deeper and murkier before the Bush Administration is finally history.