Ranger (alongside Tillman): Shooters could not have been 10 yards from Tillman

The Army Ranger who was alongside Pat Tillman when he was shot in Afghanistan told ESPN.com Friday that he remains convinced that the former NFL player was accidentally killed by friendly fire, rather than a target of a malicious act.

Sgt. Bryan O'Neal disputed Army doctors who, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press, voiced suspicions shortly after the 2004 incident about the close proximity of the three bullet holes in Tillman's forehead and tried, initially without success, to get authorities to investigate whether the former NFL player's death amounted to a crime.

--snip--

"No, there is no way the guy was 10 yards away. That is just completely unlikely," O'Neal told ESPN.com. "If he was there initially, like the way the conspiracy theorists work that he was there to kill Pat, why wouldn't he have killed me? That doesn't work so well. "

"There is no way that was the case ," O'Neal said. "You'd be able to make out their face. You'd know exactly who was shooting. Yeah, there is no possible way they were just 10 yards away."

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=2951521

That he doesn't believe anyone would actually do that? Why is this even a story?

that is why he is speaking

He basically makes a very strong case for Tillman being murdered.

"There is no way that was the case ," O'Neal said. "You'd be able to make out their face. You'd know exactly who was shooting. Yeah, there is no possible way they were just 10 yards away."

If the doctors' examination holds true, it's going to be very hard for the military to spin this as anything but a frag.

He was fucking there!

He's basically saying "I can't believe they would actually do that".

I know nothing! I see nothing!

No matter all the contradictions, the WH and the military need to come clean on this. I'd trust a civilian investigation of this a lot more than a military one.

at least initially, as of yesterday?

I've never fired a M-16, how accurate are they?

...I haven't fired one since 1975. The thing I wonder about is being able to put 3 rounds (in an automatic burst) into a forehead sized target at, what, 11 meters = 30+ feet. I would think the weapon would have ridden off that small a target at that distance (by the third round, I mean).

in the group.

It would be damn near impossible to put a 3 rd auto burst into a target that size at 50 yards. At ten yards, it's conceivable. At 5 yards, not too difficult at all.

has no full-auto setting, just a 3-round burst. For a highly trained shooter (like many Rangers) putting all three shots on a human forehead-sized target at 10 yards' distance is possible, if difficult in a combat situation. It would be easier, of course, if the target didn't think you were an enemy...

On the other hand, if the shooter was 100 yards away as the official story claims, firing every shot of a three-round burst into a small moving target during the chaos of combat would be a superhuman feat of marksmanship on par with Lee Harvey Oswald. The world's best shooter on his best day might be able to pull it off, but unless that's the case something smells.

You're right of course, that first shot could be quite accurate. The second and third in a three round burst though, not so much.

All guns have a bit of a recoil, and although I'm nowhere near a ballistics expert, some very simple questions arise here.

Since the shots were in the forehead, the first one would have probably killed him, or at least caused his head to start to slump. For three to be grouped tightly, one of the following scenarios is likely:

Two or three different people shot more or less simultaneously. (That sounds pretty deliberate.)
Someone with either rock-hard grip or a gun that's held against something was used. If it's the former, it could have been an accident, but if it's the latter, it sounds deliberate.

Regardless of everything, the unvarnished deceit is despicable, and the attempt to use him in his death to feed a lie to which he was opposed is worse than that.

Have ballistics tests been done on the shells?

...given the existence of a recoil-buffer spring in the stock.

might have well have thrown his head back and compensated for the slight muzzle climb at close range.

unless the last two were after he was on the ground - which would REALLY be telling


the report says that the damage was...quite severe. The entry wounds are visible in what little remained of his head. But someone said that was just basically a flap of skin. I expect the three-round burst pretty much passed through in a stream. The first didn't have time to move his head before the others passed through.

how do they know it was an M-16? I doubt anyone recovered bullets. They'd have been half a mile away.

A sniper rifle, from great distance? Then the multiple wounds are a question. But how much do we believe THAT?

I read somewhere the dr. initially thought it was one wound, it was changed later to three.

Since an M-16 fires a 3-round burst, perhaps someone felt that would make it look more accidental. Maybe the lies are generating more lies. They said three when it really was one, but then someone said that means close enough to see who... now that have to figure out how to dodge THAT...

could simultaneously shoot someone in the head with all bullets ending close to each other. That would be a real stretch.

the most recent "official" story of panicky soldiers firing from their HumVee:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/03/AR2005050301502.html


is clearly just lie #3.

There is no way that they "turned their guns on Tillman" from 65 yds and one panicky (but lucky) expert marksman put a 3-round burst dead center in his forehead.

THAT is contradicted by the evidence. So we have a clean slate - no credible account of what happened

And yet the names of the soldiers in his unit are known, at least to the army, and they could be produced. So much time has passed and they have had ample time to get their stories straight, that it is probably pointless though. Unless... unless... they were 65 yds away and the shots came from...


from...





from...




from...




the grassy knoll!

me a lot. Again, that age old, age old question, what are they hiding?

And in this situation, is it even legal? Exec priv for what, against or for who? Bush or Cheney???

but come on, throw me a bone

grassy knoll was funny!

wasn't it?

...and quite unexpected.

:D

Hmmmm.

indeed.

...because he didn't want to be mistaken for Pat. :shrug:

And when I say I believe him, I mean that I believe that this is what he truly feels to be the truth.

The problem is, we have no idea what the truth of the matter is. I hope someday we do.

If it was 10 yards, than perhaps Mr. O'Neal becomes a prime suspect. He'd certainly have motivation to lie about the distance. His use of "conspiracy theorists" is a red flag - a CIA tactic to discourage questioning the official story (see: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=105797&mesg_id=105984).

If it were "friendly fire" with 3 close grouped shots to the head, I find it hard to believe the shooter isn't known....the guy who did the shooting, even if its a few hundred yards has to eventually realize what he's done and would admit to it. How could an investigation not turn up the weapon the bullets came from?

With Bush claiming Executive Privilage, I'm even more skeptical that this was a case of "friendly fire".

Tillman had to be shot around 10 yards for the type of wound and that was the physicians analysis.Do we want to rationalize anything else? Just like the scientist in England that kept saying there were no WMDs in Iraq...he "commited sucicide" after he told an associate that he would meet him in Iraq next week. You don't want to think this nation could be that rotten.

as they were thought to be the enemy. Why would one survive and the other be shot in the head?

..I just wondered about the ability to place a 3 shot grouping on a forehead-sized target, from a weapon firing a 3-round burst, at +/- 30 feet...obviously anything further makes it increasingly unlikely.

Didn't FRONTLINE do a apecial on this? If I remember correctly, someone close to Tillman (O'Neal?) stated that he had been called in to write an after-action report on what had happened and was then ordered to leave the report without signing it...when it was presented to investigators it's substance had been changed substantially.

and if he was involved in the fragging.

I was just thinking that.

Let's pick this sucker apart:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhwInUN8UY0

Senate/House panel (Armed Services Committee?) conducting an investigation into the Tillman death...his family was there, along with a bunch of brass and some EM's from Tillman's unit...there is a thread on it here somewhere, but I can't find it...it has some very interesting testimony regarding the initial investigation.

ON Edit: It was a committee on accuracy of battlefield reporting chaired by Henry Waxman on April 24 of this year. C-SPAN has a link to it (4 hours long) but the video has been removed.

I'm not saying that guy did it but the "conspiracy theorist" phrase usually gets thrown own when you want to discredit someone without actually do the work to prove them wrong.

It's a red flag for me anyway.

FAMILY DEMANDS THE TRUTH
New inquiry may expose events that led to Pat Tillman’s death
Robert Collier, Chronicle Staff Writer

Sunday, September 25, 2005


The battle between a grieving family and the U.S. military justice system is on display in thousands of pages of documents strewn across Mary Tillman’s dining room table in suburban San Jose. As she pores through testimony from three previous Army investigations into the killing of her son, former football star Pat Tillman, by his fellow Army Rangers last year in Afghanistan, she hopes that a new inquiry launched in August by the Pentagon’s inspector general finally will answer the family’s questions:

Were witnesses allowed to change their testimony on key details, as alleged by one investigator? Why did internal documents on the case, such as the initial casualty report, include false information? When did top Pentagon officials know that Tillman’s death was caused by friendly fire, and why did they delay for five weeks before informing his family?

“There have been so many discrepancies so far that it’s hard to know what to believe,” Mary Tillman said. “There are too many murky details.” The files the family received from the Army in March are heavily censored, with nearly every page containing blacked-out sections; most names have been deleted. (Names for this story were provided by sources close to the investigation.) At least one volume was withheld altogether from the family, and even an Army press release given to the media has deletions. On her copies, Mary Tillman has added competing marks and scrawls — countless color-coded tabs and angry notes such as “Contradiction!” “Wrong!” and “????”


snip:


For example, the documents contain testimony of the first investigating officer alleging that Army officials allowed witnesses to change key details in their sworn statements so his finding that certain soldiers committed “gross negligence” could be softened.

from my files..fly


FAMILY DEMANDS THE TRUTH
New inquiry may expose events that led to Pat Tillman’s death
Robert Collier, Chronicle Staff Writer

Sunday, September 25, 2005

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/09/25/MNGD7ETMNM1.DTL

The soldier next to him testified: “I could hear the pain in his voice as he called out, ‘Cease fire, friendlies, I am Pat f—ing Tillman, dammit.” He said this over and over until he stopped,” having been hit by three bullets in the forehead, killing him.

The soldier continued, “I then looked over at my side to see a river of blood coming down from where he was … I saw his head was gone.” Two other Rangers elsewhere on the mountainside were injured by shrapnel.

Kevin was unaware that his brother had been killed until nearly an hour later when he asked if anyone had seen Pat and a fellow soldier told him.

Tillman’s death came at a sensitive time for the Bush administration — just a week before the Army’s abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq became public and sparked a huge scandal. The Pentagon immediately announced that Tillman had died heroically in combat with the enemy, and President Bush hailed him as “an inspiration on and off the football field, as with all who made the ultimate sacrifice in the war on terror.”



snip at the end of this was this...



snip:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
‘IT’S HARD TO KNOW WHAT TO BELIEVE’
That’s the lament of Mary Tillman, above, a teacher of special education in a San Jose public school. She has long pressed the Army to reopen its investigation into the friendly-fire killing of her son, Pat Tillman, in a canyon in Afghanistan on April 22, . The persistence of Mary Tillman and her former husband, Patrick Tillman, was rewarded when the Pentagon’s inspector general opened a new inquiry in August, the fourth such probe. Mary Tillman says she hopes questions created by discrepancies in past testimony will finally be answered.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



STORY CHANGES OVER TIME
An officer in Pat Tillman's Ranger battalion who directed the first investigation into the soldier's death served as a witness on Nov. 14, 2004, in the third investigation, which was led by Brig. Gen. Gary Jones. The first investigator complained that the officers in charge of the second invest-

igation had allowed Rangers involved in the shooting to change their testimony.





THREAT OF PERJURY CHARGES
An excerpt from a March 3, 2005, memorandum by

Brig. Gen. Gary Jones describes how Capt. William Saunders, the commander of Pat Tillman's Ranger company, was threatened with perjury charges. Jones' memo said Saunders made false claims that he had informed his superiors that platoon commander Lt. David Uthlaut had protested orders given to him leading up to the incident. Despite this threat, Saunders was allowed to change his testimony and was granted immunity.

E-mail Robert Collier at rcollier@sfchronicle.com.

Whoever shot him was close enough to see his face.

Now, just a quick observation:

"If he was there initially, like the way the conspiracy theorists work that he was there to kill Pat, why wouldn't he have killed me?

If Tillman was the target then the shooter hit his mark. If they would have shot O'Neal then that would have been the accident. YES


And it's also intersting that O'Neal received a promotion.

Finally something else that reeks, WHY DID THEY BURN ALL TILLMAN'S BELONGINGS?!?!?
(This wasn't in this article, but I have read it elsewhere....)

Yeah, you would, as a matter of fact....

people receive promotions all the time.......I ordered my squad to open fire on civilians.........they had their weapons pointed at us and had already shot a few rounds at us.......We killed 2 of them and I got promoted to E-7..........

Fucking conspiracy nutters want to believe this so badly.........God this is an embarassing time to be at DU, the Cindy defenders, and now the Tillman conspiracy tinfoilers.........Pathetic.......

that covered up Tillman's death.

No need to don a tinfoil hat.

and 9/11 was Bushs doing too......... :eyes:

:eyes:

:think: yourself


CONSPIRACY:

1. the act of conspiring.

2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.

3. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to cover up the death of a service member for the government.

4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.

5. any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.

1. collusion, sedition.

2. Conspiracy, plot, intrigue, cabal all refer to surreptitious or covert schemes to accomplish some end, most often an evil one. A conspiracy usually involves a group entering into a secret agreement to achieve some illicit or harmful objective: a vicious conspiracy to control prices. A plot is a carefully planned secret scheme, usually by a small number of persons, to secure sinister ends: a plot to seize control of a company. An intrigue usually involves duplicity and deceit aimed at achieving either personal advantage or criminal or treasonous objectives: the petty intrigues of civil servants. Cabal refers either to a plan by a small group of highly-placed persons to overthrow or control a government, or to the group of persons themselves: a cabal of powerful lawmakers.


So, we have a government who has intentionally lied about the way Tillman died. Therefore I would think that would qualify as a conspiracy.
We have a pResident who has claimed executive privilege on his death.
We have the Army stepping in to demote generals involved in the cover-up of Tillman's death...

Are you part of the cover up? Because you sure are defensive on this topic and seem to be on the government!

I'm just a simple soldier that knows how easy it is to kill a friend on a battlefield.......With an M-16 I can put 3 shots in a 2 inch circle from 100 meters away........I and many others do it all the time on weapons ranges.........especially when we use paper targets........

Sorry I don't buy the "killing Tillman" story.........there is no evidence to make think it was anything other than an accident........Give me some hard evidence and I'll consider it......I have a very open mind, but a very low tolerance for crazy ass nutter conspiracy theories........

They lied about how he was killed, that he was killed by the Taliban.

Then the story changed. He was killed by "friendly fire."

I don't blame the soldiers that opened fire on their buddies. I have no idea if it was intentional or not.

I do know this much. The Army and government LIED.

WHY?!?!?!?!?!?

And according to this WaPo article: The Tillman brothers served together in the "Black Sheep," otherwise known as 2nd Platoon, A Company, 2nd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment. They were elite -- special operators transferred from Iraq in the spring to conduct sweep and search missions against the Taliban and al Qaeda remnants in eastern Afghanistan. The Rangers worked with CIA paramilitaries, Afghan allies and other special forces on grid-by-grid patrols designed to flush out and entrap enemy guerrillas. They moved in small, mobile, lethal units.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35717-2004Dec4?language=printer

Is the CIA paramilitaries responsible? I don't have an answer to that either. But they were present....

These are the questions THAT need to be answered to put any and all conspiracies to rest. But when you have a pResident who has laid claim to executive privilege then something stinks to the high heavens.

So, in regard to the conspiracy, the highest levels within our government has played a major role. I would only hope that if something like that had happened to you, that you would want your family to know the truth. That is all!

the government lies everyday of your life.......

Clinton lied, Bush lied, they all lie.........Give me a freaking break.........Your evidence is that the govt. lied? How naive are you

Of course governments lie. Again if you had been killed and the government lied about it, wouldn't you want your family to know the truth???

I guess you would prefer them to be deaf, blind, and dumb!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It is quite clear from reading these posts that's what she is saying.
I think it might be beneath you to to call someone an idiot for that.
You are quite clear that you are in the Army, have killed civilians (if they were firing at you, you have the right under rules of combat to do so) and that you can shoot real good. We get that.
Calling a poster an idiot for her opinion is pretty lame, however. Maybe a bit intimidating, too. Is this your intent?

It seems to break down to this:
1. the cover story of "killed by Taliban", which changed to friendly fire was not a mistake, but deliberate.
2. Evidence was destroyed. Executive Privilege was invoked. WTF is up with that?
3. If more than one person was responsible for this, then that is de facto conspiracy.

I have no idea whether it was friendly fire or a fragging or an assassination. Likely neither do you.
MMuffin is only talking about the coverup and collusion, IMO.
I do think an investigation would be in order.
Do you agree with that?

Is it normal for authorities to burn diaries? That is wrong and smells of coverup also. Destroying evidence of a possible crime is not a good practice, is it?
Would you want the Army (or police, or anyone really) to hide the truth, whatever it is, from your family? I would not. And I would want them to have my diary/journals.

You may have a different opinion on that. If you do, just say so, rather than calling names. Just calling names is childish, and beneath a soldier's honor, in my opinion.

Funny he didn't want to address my questions. Instead he only resorted to name calling. That pretty much tells me a lot about his character.

Thanks for the support and the thoughtful post:thumbsup:

I don't buy that conspiracy, either. Without the evidence to prove this claim all some can do is yell and beat their chests over it. They come across as looking like fools.

The only question I raised was about these doctors doing the autopsy. Are they experienced in the field of criminology and all that? That's what I wondered when this all came out.

I was in the army so the bullet holes being as they claimed isn't a surprise. A soldier could do that easily and a lot farther than 10 yards. My understanding is that the damage a bullet does is a strong indicator of how far away the shooter and/or shooters might have been. Do these doctors know how much damage three bullets from that caliber does when shot from 10 yards?

Only someone experienced in this field can answer these questions which is why I'm not sure how qualified these doctors are.

I'm still in the Army and routinely zero my weapon on a paper target putting three rounds within a 2 inch area.........It's not that hard if you have the training........

Perfect example: Pure speculation.......

Let's say Tillman was in the prone position when the first round hit, if he was in the prone and braced then hitting him 3 times in the head would not have been difficult at all even from 100 meters or so.......

I just have seen nothing to prove to me he was killed on purpose........Not one fact other than people bleating that "bush ordered it because Tillman was antiwar".........As if the dude gives a crap what the troops think.......Tillmann was not exactly a hero to other guys in uniform, he was a football star that wanted to prove his "manhood" in the Army.......Not many troops were exactly heartbroken when he was killed.......Don't take that the wrong way, soldiers universally don't feel the same sense of loss for someone they don't know, especially one that they doubted joined for good reasons........

Hey don't shoot the messenger......

To me this all makes it sound like the doctors don't have the experience to make those judgments and I'm not claiming anything...I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn last night :)

As far as the rest of it. I've often wondered if other troops felt like the media was focusing too much on Tillman rather than the rest of them that are bleeding and dying. It would be understandable to feel some resentment over that. Not to say that Tillman wasn't a good man. I believe he was a very good person.

No shooting from me :)

Tillmann was not exactly a hero to other guys in uniform, he was a football star that wanted to prove his "manhood" in the Army.......Not many troops were exactly heartbroken when he was killed.......Don't take that the wrong way, soldiers universally don't feel the same sense of loss for someone they don't know, especially one that they doubted joined for good reasons........

So, now you know Pat's intentions, as well as other guys in uniform. Sheesh.

in uniform when I'm in uniform with them..........

they FUCKING lied about what happened initially.
they FUCKING covered up their FUCKING lies.
they FUCKING issued executive privilege to suppress evidence.

you believe whatever the FUCK you want to believe. leave the research to people who actually give two shits. take a hike if this embarrasses you.

Just a hunch. :shrug:

I mean I think this a bit much. There is no reason to put this on a person when you have no evidence to make that claim.

:)

For propaganda purposes only? Why was there resistance to an investigation? We will most likely never know. No investigation will just lead to speculation whether innocent or not.

The insurgency in Iraq was heating up, and there was no perceivable progress being made in Afghanistan.

It wasn't just that an all-American football hero and poster boy for "patriotism" had been offed by friendly fire, it was all the really BAD news that was coming out at the very same time.

The incident itself was rife with incompetence, violations of the ROE, and utterly stupid orders being passed down the line under pressure to show "progress". Once it became clear that Tillman had been killed by "friendly fire", there were layers and layers of command that started madly scrambling to cover their asses.

One of the biggest (and stupidest) violations was the splitting up of the platoon in the first place, and the ridiculous insistence that the disabled hummer be towed forward instead of being left behind or simply destroyed.

This was all happening under the pressure from higher ups to show "progress" in the Afghanistan mission. Tillman's platoon was sent out on a non-urgent mission by commanders being pressured to meet arbitrary check-offs set by desk jockeys and PR men.

The resistance to investigation comes from all the layers of command who were endeavoring to cover their asses over a total fuck-up.

sw

... When grunts are telling me doctors are full of shit, that means something's up, in my book.

that lets Bush off the hook.

Ranger.

3 rounds in less than 6 inches at 30+meters is damn excellent shooting, nearing superhuman. I shot Expert w/an M-16, and those targets get pretty small as the distance increases.

First, was he wearing a helmet, or a forage cap?

Second, w/either, finding a forehead in a mass of rocks is not easy, at 30 meters, or 30 feet.

Third, what position was he in, prone, kneeling, standing?

Fourth, the first round would have sent his head back, changing the target. I would think that being shot in the forehead would drop him immediately into the ground/dust in any case.


There is more to this story than we are being told.

From the headwounds I've treated, albeit not 5.56mm rounds in most cases, the effect is devastating. There is a lot of pressure built up as the projectile enters the skull, and the brain is liquified at the point of impact, the exit wounds would have literally blasted the back of his skull right off.

The BIG question, why was no one else hit if this incredible shot was out there, seems to me he had complete control of the entire kill zone?