Man, how lame it is to hear some of you stating for a fact that "This is not true." ...Where is your proof? The whole account is told to us
fourth-hand (actual-shooter > army > media > you). Fact is, RANT's explanation makes more sense to me because it's so obvious and I think the
bosses are evil enough.
The main two questions about conspiracy theories in general are: 1:
Are those conspiring smart enough to pull it off, and 2:
audience sufficiently stupified to accept it? The answer in this case is yes on both counts.
I have met many smart people and I have no doubt that it is possible that when Tillman enlisted, somebody may have put a red check-mark next to his
name with the note, "If we need a sob-story, take this guy out."
The main question is this: Can parts of the military be
If a shadow-government (if such exists) wants to place a sniper on a nearby hill (perhaps tracking Tillman, their golden boy until the time they need
a distraction) who then picks a key moment to fire, it would not be a novel idea and wouldn't require much thinking, only ruthless political
...Wait now, what was all that about the confusion regarding what kind of bullet was pulled from Reagan's body? Was it a rifle or a devastator
bullet? I can't remember.
...Snipers firing while patsies fire simultaneously? Oh what a novel concept!
Byrd Said: 2) The death of a single soldier doesn't and didn't affect the Abu Ghraib scandal. We haven't seen more news or dramatic
news or Abu Ghraib information that was impacted by Tillman at all.
Byrd, I think you might be underestimating the effect of the televised NFL/Tillman memorials which certainly affected much of Dubya's states.
[edit on 13-11-2005 by smallpeeps]