deadissue.com

In the days since I first read this story, there’s been a number of articles written that leverage Tillman’s parents’ statements to fit a larger argument against government secrecy. And while secrecy is part of this case, the larger problem centers on this instinctive urge to tell a lie, and how easy and often it seems to happen within the Bush administration. What was the justification for resorting to lies in the case of Pat Tillman’s death?

At the heart of any answer to the question ‘why’ is the apparent sense of entitlement President Bush has allowed to dictate his actions since well before his political career was first born. This sickness allows a religious man like Bush to feel deserving of the luxury, the right to more than just Tillman’s life, but all the political capital that could be squeezed from lying about his death. While it is crystal clear that Bush had no right to invent a legacy, his goal had nothing to do with Pat Tillman at all, but was purely based in selfishness.

Tillman’s celebrity was seen as merely a gift to our President, rather than a testament to the man himself. He was and should represent forever a lasting memory of selflessness in the face of mortal danger that all of us can draw courage and pride from. The sacrifice that was made is one that baffles the mind, especially within a culture that too often attaches the ‘hero’ label to anything that could possibly equal a point or two in the ratings. And his death caused us all to pause, and realize that our enjoyment of life and all America has to offer us is less of a right than it is a privilege.

He was killed by friendly fire, and there’s absolutely nothing wrong or dirty about that. Anyone who knows a thing about combat understands that on the battlefield, tragedies are easy to come by. The circumstances surrounding ‘how’ he died were inconsequential to me and likely would have been to his family or anyone else. Because the point of all this, and what we should be teaching our children, is not how he died but instead the fact that he volunteered in the first place. That was and still is the most heroic thing Pat Tillman could have done.

It’s this focus on the details and the need for a ‘story’ to tack onto his death that angers me more than anything. What was our President saying with all of this? That the manner in which he perished would have diminished the sense of what he sacrificed for his country? I can’t imagine what else he must have thought, and that it happened amidst an election, where his opponent John Kerry was facing similar distortions of his own service, paints an even clearer picture of what President Bush and his friends are all about.

The sacrifice one makes in enlisting is something that matters very little to him and others in his administration. Why? They never came close to exhibiting such courage themselves. So the focus must naturally shift from that sacrifice and focus instead on what happened afterwards. And it was this fundamental lack of understanding that prompted the lies that followed. Dying because of friendly fire wasn’t good enough for President Bush or the people who talked him into acting on such a despicable notion.

I’m sickened by this as I too have felt that internal sorrow with rifle in hand on the other side of the world, the knowledge that my government doesn’t appreciate me or anyone around me, but will exploit what we do for their own purposes any chance they get. When the embassies in Africa were blown up by Osama Bin Laden, we were all focused on Headline News and preparing ourselves mentally for what followed. And as I was working a Christmas Day 24-hour guard rotation at the front gate of our post in Vilseck, Germany – the politicians were shouting ‘No War For Monica’.

And there you have the truth of where the disconnect lies when it comes to our military and our government. The politicians don’t see the courage they talk of so often, but only political opportunity. They didn’t care in the least that Americans died needlessly in Africa no more than they cared to present a truthful account of Tillman’s death and how the circumstances diminished nothing about his sacrifice. The truth of his death wasn’t worth enough to them, so they simply made up a story that qualified within their morbid rationale of what’s acceptably ‘heroic’.

To them a soldier’s sacrifice only equals an opportunity to get votes and criticize opponents, but nothing more. Pat Tillman’s sacrifice will always mean something to me, as it will mean something to every American. I just wish it meant something more to President Bush than a political opportunity. By lying about it, they raped our perception of what’s truly important here, and planted a seed of ignorance that incorrectly tells us that how he died was somehow dishonorable when it wasn’t. His family and our country deserved better.

”Pat had high ideals about the country; that’s why he did what he did,” Mary Tillman said in her first lengthy interview since her son’s death. ”The military let him down. The administration let him down. It was a sign of disrespect. The fact that he was the ultimate team player and he watched his own men kill him is absolutely heartbreaking and tragic. The fact that they lied about it afterward is disgusting.”

Anyone whose been exposed to the story of a sting operation on a recruiter by a boy named David McSwane, might be wondering what kind of people these recruiters were. How could a soldier in the United States Army in good faith lead a young man to a website where he could obtain a fake high school diploma and then inform him of how to beat a drug test? For the answer to this question, all you’d have to do is head down to the video store and rent Glengary Glenross.

These are salesmen out trying to hook people up with a product they have no interest in buying. Only it’s not vinyl siding, stereo speakers, life insurance or Jehovah, but instead a signing bonus they may never get to spend and money for college classes they may never attend. Consider for a moment having to sell the idea to a young person that if they sign up now, they could get free training, medical and a canvas armored Humvee to tour the Iraqi countryside in. It’s about as daunting a task as any of us could possibly face in this life.

The notion that our recruiting shortfalls have more to do with the market and availability of school loans than a lack of support for the war, has been made by many since I started posting my contrary opinion on the political blogs. The mainstream press has thus far resisted linking the recruiting shortfall with a lack of support for the war.

My impression is that the topic is one that people would rather not touch at all if they don’t have to. This story about the recruiters is an instance ala Abu Gharib where the mission from up top will be to sandbag these two little guys as soon as possible and hope the story goes away. Like torture, it will still go on, but the very mention of it will be hit with the ‘liberal bias’ flamethrower and half of the country will conveniently consider it a dead issue.

These recruiters are currently in a position that this administration has put too many Americans in already. It’s the ‘I don’t care how you do it, but get me the numbers’ method of leadership that brought down Enron and a number of other corporations. I like to call it the ‘F*&K YOU, WHERE’S MY MONEY’ strategy. Famously successful in the mob, but extremely damaging when used within a civilized organization.

How it works is your boss tells you that they hate to be like this, but they’re feeling even more pressure from their boss. You tell your subordinates the same thing. At some point the people at the bottom get creative and start cutting corners. They purposely cause blackouts in California, cook the books and teach recruits how to beat drug tests. You’re happy because your boss isn’t busting your chops. You may even find it odd that employee A tends to get more done than employee B, but with a family to feed at home, you’ll take it. Sometime down the road it blows up, heads are chopped off, problem solved.

The healthy organization looks at the wrongdoing and asks itself whether such a thing could be happening across the board, and if so, what’s compelling these employees to resort to such methods. The dysfunctional organization looks to rid itself of the problem as quickly as possible and hopes that the dispatching of the guilty employees serves as an example to any others who would be dumb enough to get caught in the future. They get rid of enough people to make it look like they’re addressing the problem and otherwise act like nothing ever happened.

Ala Goofus and Gallant from the Highlights children’s magazine, the healthy organization seeks out the cause, while the dysfunctional organization ignores the cause and continues to pound the square peg into a round hole. In the case of our government and its leadership following the attacks of 9/11, it’s been Goofus all the way.

I predict that these recruiters will get dragged across the coals and word will go out that no shady methods are to be discussed over the phone or email. Will recruits who would be publicly considered unqualified still get in? Sure, but nobody will have evidence that a recruiter did what these two recruiters engaged in. Just as nobody abusing detainees will be snapping pictures of it anytime soon.

Politically the situation will be neutralized, and from that point forward anyone mentioning it can be accused of having a ‘liberal bias’. Problem solved. That is, unless you’re a recruiter. Their lives will continue to get tougher as the months go by, while President Bush and his administration ignore the cause of both the recruiting shortfalls and the shady methods being used.

The rate of divorce amongst recruiters has been on the rise, as have stress related disorders. In the military it’s often about doing more with less, and while this is good enough when it comes to digging ditches and peeling potatoes, it’ll never work in the recruiting mission. These soldiers are receiving zero support from their leadership and it doesn’t look like that’s going to change anytime soon.

They’re the little people being squashed by the ‘f*&k you, where’s my money’ leadership method of the Bush administration. With this being the case, the media will most likely stay away from connecting the dots and comply with the story of this being the work of two ‘bad apples’ and not reflective of the organization.

Having been in the military and known several recruiters in my day, I can safely say that what the kid exposed happens all the time. Stories of what a recruiter lied about to get you to sign on the dotted line start swirling around that first day of basic training and continue until the day you go home for good.

What recruiters have to do is in most ways no different than what any other salesman in our culture does. It’s the product that separates them from other salesmen, and it’s the product that’s flawed at this point in time. Recruiters are an example of the best our military has to offer, and this fact should not get lost in the shuffle as this story unfolds.

While the National Guard soldiers who are currently behind bars were guilty of something much worse than these recruiters, the lack of interest over identifying and ridding the cause of their behavior on the part of our country’s leadership should serve as a warning of what will most likely happen here. The ‘f*&k you, where’s my money’ method of leadership will continue to make the job of our recruiters tougher, and the problem isn’t going to go away. Removing cameras and screaming ‘liberal bias’ has protected our leaders from having to deal with the mistreatment of prisoners, but labeling these two recruiters ‘bad apples’ will do nothing to solve the problem at hand.