WND Commentary Submission

WND commentary submission

------

Tom Kovach

1483 N. Mt. Juliet Rd. Ste. 209

Mount Juliet, TN 37122-3315

h: (615) 773-1709

c: (615) 417-2308

e-mail:

------

Tom Kovach lives near Nashville, is a former USAF Blue Beret, and has written for several online publications. He recently published his first book. Tom is an inventor, a horse wrangler, a certified paralegal, and a talk-show host. He has also run for Congress. To learn more, visit:

------

Photo link:

Truth: still the first casualty

Released document raises more questions that answers about Pat Tillman's death

by: Tom Kovach

The old saying that "the first casualty of war is truth" seems to be alive and well. The most recent example is a batch of newly-released military documents (obtained by the Associated Press, via a FOIA request) related to the death of Pat Tillman. For those that might have been purposely avoiding the news for the past several years, Tillman gave up a lucrative career as a football player in the NFL, and joined the Army after the "9-11" attacks. He became a Ranger, and was later killed during a firefight in Afghanistan.

Now, the question resufaces, "Killed by whom?"

Two key points arise from the new revelations about the incident. One, various witnesses agree that Tillman's last known words were to chide a fellow platoon member to stop "sniveling" during a firefight. Second, that the cause of Tillman's death was three rounds to the forehead — from an M-16 rifle. Very few of our enemies carry the M-16, for a variety of reasons. Our enemies prefer the Kaliashnikov-designed AK-47, which is more powerful, more rugged, and more reliable under the dirt-laden conditions of combat. Because of its greater size and power, the wounds from an AK-47 round (especially to the head) would be easily distinguished from the wounds from an M-16.

The above point becomes even more true when examined under a known feature of M-16 ballistics. Although the 5.56mm bullet of the M-16 is less powerful than the 7.65mm bullet of the AK-47, there is one unique advantage of the M-16 round. The farther it travels from the rifle's barrel, the more ballistically unstable it becomes. Thus, the M-16 bullet is said to "tumble" through the air toward its target. (It's not a true "tumble", like a tumbleweed. It's more like a fighter plane in a barrel roll, but with the nose remaining on one straight trajectory.) Why is that an advantage? Because, when it hits its human target, the M-16 bullet has a tendency to zig-zag through the body, instead of cleanly passing through. Thus, it has been nicknamed a "bone chaser" bullet.

The military's medical examiners concluded that Tillman was shot in the forehead three times by an M-16 from a range of ten yards or less. At that range, the bullet's damage would resemble the damage from a hitman's .22-caliber pistol, except that the rifle might leave more burn damage and possibly more gunshot residue. At close range, the M-16 bullet has not had enough distance to begin tumbling.

Because of some special duties, and months-long preparation for a high-level military competition (Peacekeeper Challenge; 1983; now known as Defender Challenge), I have fired thousands more M-16 rounds than even most of the people that did the same job in the Air Force that I did. As a result, not only was I rated as an "expert" marksman by Air Force standards, but would've also been rated "expert" by Marine Corps standards. (398 points out of a possible 400) Despite being a pretty good shot, I can understand how hard it would be to put three rounds into a man's forehead at dusk, on a hillside, firing uphill, while he maneuvers on the ridge, in the heat of combat. According to previous reports, Tillman was in a separate element of his Ranger platoon, seeking a high-ground advantage over the Taliban militia that had discovered them as the Rangers were trying to regroup with their company after a mission. The Ranger platoon was in a mountain "saddle", and the Taliban militiamen were about to come over the ridge above them. If that happened, the Ranger platoon would become easy targets, "like fish in a bowl". Tillman was part of a small team that had moved up toward the ridge to slow down the advance of the militia, so that the rest of the Ranger platoon could escape.

In such a heated situation, is it possible that one of Tillman's teammates began to crack under pressure? And, if so, did that teammate suggest "bugging out" to save themselves? After all, the team was in the wrong place to begin with, having been separated from their company by a series of unfortunate events. With a handful of American Rangers headed toward the ridge from one side, and a platoon-size element of Taliban militia headed to the same ridge from the other side, the battle could be decided in a matter of seconds, depending upon who got the high-ground advantage.

The Ranger platoon needed every man on that team to make it to the top of the ridge. If even one decided to run, to save himself, the entire platoon could have been wiped out. (They weren't, but they had no way to predict that at the time.) Did Tillman confront a team member that had considered running? Did that team member shoot Tillman in the head? (Remember, the A3 version of the M-16 rifle is capable of firing a three-round burst with a single pull of the trigger. This saves ammunition, compared to the full-auto "spray and pray" technique of older M-16 versions.) At close range, in the hands of an experienced marksman, the three rounds in an A3 burst would hit close together. For close-in fighting, Rangers are trained to make head shots, so that the enemy cannot squeeze the trigger as he is dying from a body shot.

Of course, there are other possible scenarios. One is that Tillman stood up to maneuver, just as a teammate was firing at an enemy somewhere across Tillman's intended path. Another is that a Taliban fighter picked up an M-16 from somewhere, either in that battle or at some time previous. Another is that a fellow Ranger was shot, thus changing his aim, and accidentally hit Tillman instead of his intended target.

At this point, the trail of evidence is cold at best. Memories might have become a little fuzzy over the years. A new investigation might not even be able to find all of the witnesses that were available when the incident was still recent. There is no guarantee that, even if Congress appointed a blue-ribbon commission of outside investigators with no preconceived political agenda, the results would be any more conclusive than the existing investigative reports.

One fact remains. There were two casualties on that ridge in Afghanistan on that fateful day in 2004: Pat Tillman, and the truth.