"Throwing My Shoe at Bob Woodward ... Not" (DRAFT January 2011)

BOB WOODWARD’S WHITEWASH OF GEN.
MCCHRYSTAL’S ROLE IN THE TILLMAN COVER-UP
Woodward’s Portrayal of McChrystal’s Role in the Tillman Cover-Up:
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs [Adm. Michael] Mullen revered Gen. McChrystal, and had made
him director of the Joint Staff – his previous assignment – in part so that the 2008 Senate
confirmation could wipe away the role McChrystal had played in the cover-up of the 2004
friendly-fire death in Afghanistan of Pat Tillman. …”Of course, McChrystal was in the chain of
command. But he was not the hands-on person making that decision” … McChrystal had
signed off*on the Silver Star recommendation that suggested Tillman had been killed by the
enemy, a choice he regretted.
McChrystal was essentially the chairman‟s deputy. Director of the Joint Staff was the premier
assignment for a three-star, an almost certain path to four-star rank. Among McChrystal‟s
predecessors in the post were DNI Dennis Blair, former Centcom commander Abiziad, and the
current Army chief Gen Casey.
Mullen realized that the solution to Afghanistan was right before his eyes. On Monday May 11,
2009 [Defense Secretary] Gates announced McChrystal would be the new commander. A week
later, Obama met for 10 minutes in the Oval Office with McChrystal.
The Pat Tillman issue resurfaced during McChrystal‟s confirmation hearings for ISAF. On
Tuesday June 2, 2009, McChrystal sat down for his Senate confirmation hearing. McChrystal
assured the Senate Armed Services Committee that he had recommended the Silver Star with the
best of intentions, but he had been too hasty in the investigative process … “and I think he
apologized for what he did in this.”
“Well, they [Washington establishment] didn't.” [dig into McChrystal‟s role in the cover-up very
much, just held some “pro forma” hearings]. … “But that whole thing is a sad chapter in Army
history.”
*Citation: p. 154 McChrystal had signed off: Ann Scott Tyson, “9 Officers Blamed in
Tillman Death, but No Coverup Found,” The Washington Post, March 27, 2007, p.A2
Note: This description was assembled using quotes from “Obama‟s Wars” and his remarks
made on NPR‟s Talk of the Nation). See my “Notes from Obama’s War’s” and Clashes with
Pentagon (NPR‟s Talk of the Nation 12-13-10) for page citations.
Guy Montag’s Rebuttal of Bob Woodward’s Portrayal of
Gen. McChrystal’s Role in the Tillman Case:
1.) “Mullen revered Gen. McChrystal, and had made him director of the Joint Staff – his
previous assignment – in part so that the 2008 Senate confirmation could wipe away the
role McChrystal had played in the cover-up of the 2004 friendly-fire death in Afghanistan
of Pat Tillman”:
During Spring 2008 Senator Webb conducted a secret “review” of Gen. McChrystal‟s actions in
the Tillman case. On May 15, 2008 Gen McChrystal met behind closed doors with the Senate
Armed Services Committee (including Chairman Levin, Senator McCain, and Senator Webb)
and discussed “in detail” his role in the Tillman case. This meeting was held in “executive
session” (i.e. closed hearing with no transcript) without listing the names of the participants in
the hearing notice.
A week later, on May 22nd 2008, the Committee held a confirmation hearing for General
Petreaus. Chairman Levin recessed briefly to hold a voice vote to confirm 144 military
nominations, without discussion, including General McChrystal‟s promotion to Director of the
Joint Staff.
Exactly how did a secret review, followed by a closed hearing, and a vote without discussion
“wipe away” McChrystal‟s role in the Tillman cover-up? There was no public testimony or
public discussion by the Senate. What was said during that closed hearing? Senator Webb and
SASC Counsel Gary Leeling refused to answer any of my questions about the hearing.
2.) “…the role McChrystal had played in the cover-up of the 2004 friendly-fire death in
Afghanistan of Pat Tillman. … … McChrystal had signed off* on the Silver Star
recommendation…”
*p. 154 McChrystal had signed off: Ann Scott Tyson, “9 Officers Blamed in Tillman
Death, but No Coverup Found,” The Washington Post, March 27, 2007, p.A2
Woodward cites a 3-27-07 Washington Post article in support of his statement “McChrystal had
signed off.” However, that article didn‟t say anything about McChrystal just “signing off” on
the Silver Star. Instead, Tyson wrote that the DODIG investigation found “[Col.] Nixon
[Commander of the Ranger RGT], along with Lt. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, …were
responsible for submitting a Silver Star recommendation for Tillman that included "inaccurate
information and a misleading citation that implied CPL Tillman died by enemy fire"…” (i.e.
false Silver Star citation, fabricated witness statements, etc). Then where did Woodward get the
phrase “signed off”? Ironically, I believe it may have been from the New York Times!
Another irony is the title of the cited article is“…No Coverup Found” (Tyson wrote, “Despite
finding several errors, the report did not find evidence of a coverup” instead, the Army
“committed „critical errors‟ in judgment in handling the „friendly fire‟ of Pat Tillman”). So,
Woodward wrote of the “coverup of the 2004 friendly-fire death in Afghanistan of Pat Tillman”
while citing a Washington Post article entitled “… No Coverup.” So which is it? You would
think that Woodward knew what he was talking about when he calls it a “coverup.”
3.) Gen. McChrystal “was not the hands-on person making that decision.”
What “decision”? The decision to cover up Pat Tillman‟s friendly-fire death and award him a
false Silver Star? I agree with Woodward that McChrystal didn‟t make “that decision” to cover-
up Tillman‟s death. However, McChrystal was the “hands on” general who supervised the
cover-up on the ground in Afghanistan and made it happen.
Who made “that decision”? Well, during the Bush administration, McChrystal commanded
JSOC special operation forces from 2003 to 2008 that acted outside the military chain of
command “doing things the executive branch -- read: [Vice President] Cheney and [Secretary of
Defense] Rumsfeld -- wanted it to do.” It certainly appears that Rumsfeld and Cheney gave
McChrystal his marching orders… Perhaps President Bush was in the loop as well to some
extent. How much does Bob Woodward know about Rumsfeld and Cheney‟s role that he‟s not
telling?
4.) “… the role McChrystal had played in the cover-up of the 2004 friendly-fire death in
Afghanistan of Pat Tillman. …“of course, McChrystal was in the chain of command. But
he was not the hands-on person making that decision” … McChrystal had signed off* on
the Silver Star recommendation that suggested Tillman had been killed by the enemy…”
Not the “hands on person”! Actually, Gen. McChrystal directly supervised the Army‟s cover-up.
McChrystal did not merely "sign off" on a piece of paper that landed on his desk as it worked its
way up the chain of command. Jon Krakauer in his book, "Where Men Win Glory" (pp. 334 –
347 paperback edition), described how Gen. McChrystal had "orchestrate[d] what can only be
described as a broad conspiracy to conceal Tillman's fratricide ..."
The Silver Star recommendation hardly “suggested” Tillman had been killed by the enemy. The
citation reads, “for gallantry in action …. against an armed enemy … enemy fire … Cpl. Tillman
put himself in the line of devastating enemy fire … known enemy positions … enemy's
withdrawal and his platoon's safe passage from the ambush kill zone.” Only, there was no
enemy fire, no enemy withdrawal and no ambush kill zone. The Silver Star citation was
carefully edited to imply Tillman died by enemy fire without actually coming out and saying
that. Anyone reading the citation would think Tillman was killed by enemy fire!
Krakauer wrote that Gen. McChrystal personally "administered the medal recommendation
process" with a false narrative that "was painstakingly written to create the impression Pat
Tillman was killed by enemy fire" and directly supervised the Ranger RGT commanding officers
in Afghanistan who apparently altered the two Silver Star witness statements to remove any
mention of friendly fire and contained false statements. “The Silver Star recommendation was
"fraudulent" by "any objective measure."
And, in response to President Obama‟s May 2009 nomination of Gen. McChrystal as Afghan
war commander, Mary Tillman wrote in her book, “Boots on the Ground by Dusk”: “Not only
is he [McChrystal] lying about the circumstances surrounding Pat‟s death, … he is proposing
false language for the Silver Star narrative.”
Note: Krakauer's account was largely based upon McChrystal‟s own testimony during his June
2, 2009 Senate confirmation hearing and from DOD IG interviews with Gen. McChrystal, COL
Nixon, LTC Kauzlarich, and LTC Bailey obtained by FOIA.
5.) Director of the Joint Staff was the premier assignment for a three-star, an almost
certain path to four-star rank. Among McChrystal’s predecessors in the post were DNI
Dennis Blair, former Centcom commander Abiziad, and the current Army chief Gen
Casey.
It appears that Gen. Abizaid perjured himself when he testified before Congress about when he
first heard of Tillman‟s fratricide. For example, Gen Abizaid and Gen McChrystal‟s testimony
about when they learned Tillman‟s fratricide are contradictory.
General Abiziad testified that General McChrystal only told him that Pat Tillman was KIA, and
never told him about the potential fratricide: “On the 22nd, the incident occurred. I believe on
about the 23rd, General McChrystal called me and told me that Corporal Tillman had been
killed in combat, and that the circumstances surrounding his death were heroic. I called the
chairman and discussed that with the chairman…” Abizaid testified that he learned about
“potential” fratricide when he finally “found” McChrystal‟s P4 memo after a week‟s delay.
Yet Gen. McChrystal testified, “Corporal Tillman was killed on the 22nd of April … I arrived
back into Afghanistan from a meeting in Qatar with General Abizaid on about the 23rd, and I
was informed, at that point, that they suspected that friendly fire might have been the cause of
death, and that they had initiated what we call a 15-6, or an investigation of that.”
Note: Previously, McChrystal had testified that he had learned of friendly-fire while in Qatar
(with Abizaid), not after returning to Afghanistan .
So, McChrystal says he learned of fratricide on the 23rd, yet Abizaid says McChrystal
told him only that Tillman was killed in action. Someone was not telling the truth. And,
as discussed below in point #8, on April 24th McChrystal was given verbal confirmation
of fratricide, making all the talk by the generals about “potential” fratricide sheer
nonsense!
For a more detailed argument, See Appendix J1 -- “Gen. McChrystal‟s Contradictory

Congressional Testimony” in the “The [Untold] Tillman Story”
6.) “On Monday May 11, 2009 Gates announced McChrystal would be the new
commander [of ISAF].”
In response, Mary Tillman wrote the President to express her concerns. In the foreword to the
paperback edition of her book, “Boots on the Ground by Dusk,” she wrote, “McChrystal‟s
actions should have been grounds for firing. That is why it was so disturbing to us when
President Obama instead promoted McChrystal to the position of top commander in Afghanistan
last year. [On May 12th,] I had sent the President an email and a letter reminding him of
McChrystal‟s involvement in the cover-up of Pat‟s death.”
Just a few weeks earlier, on April 23, 2009, the Obama administration had announced that it
would turn over to the ACLU photographs showing detainee abuse of prisoners in Afghanistan
and Iraq. However, President Obama “back pedaled” and decided to block the court-ordered
release of photos after meeting with Gen Petreaus and other military leaders on May 12th.
President Obama‟s decision represented a sharp reversal from his repeated pledges for open
government, and in particular from his promise to be forthcoming with information that courts
have ruled should be publicly available.
In light of Gen. McChrystal‟s alleged ties to torture at Camp Nama, it is worth noting the dates
of McChrystal's nomination and President Obama's decision not to release the photos of prisoner
abuse in Iraq: May 11th and 12th, respectively.
On May 13th, obviously anticipating that the Government was likely to lose its court appeal,
Obama asked Congress to change FOIA by retroactively narrowing its disclosure requirements to
prevent a legal ruling by the courts. Senator Graham said the White House “helped them draft
the bill.”
On May 20th, U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham, Joe Lieberman, and Senator John McCain
introduced the “Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act” to block the release of the
detainee photos. The very next day, on May 21st, the act was offered as an amendment to the
Supplemental Appropriations bill and the U.S. Senate unanimously passed it (I like to refer to the
bill as the “2009 McChrystal Protection Act”!).
7.) “The Pat Tillman issue resurfaced during McChrystal’s confirmation hearings for
ISAF (Afghan war command). On Tuesday June 2, 2009, McChrystal sat down for his
Senate confirmation hearing.”
The hearing was strictly pro forma.” The real hearing had been held the previous year, behind
closed doors on May 15, 2008.
Senators Levin, McCain, and Webb didn't press McChrystal aggressively during the nearly
three-hour hearing. As David Corn commented on PBS‟s News Hour: “And so the Pat Tillman
questioning, the questioning about detainee abuse, I thought, seemed very orchestrated and
didn't give a full airing to these very, I think, hot-button issues”. … “You know, he came up with
what sounded to be a plausible explanation, but, again, a lot of what happened today made it
clear to me that Democrats and Republicans had both decided, "He's our guy in Afghanistan”
Mary Tillman said, "I think more effort should have been made on the part of the committee to
find out more about his true nature, his true character and his true actions in terms of the detainee
abuse and Pat's situation.” She criticized Sen. John McCain for "playing dumb" by not following
up on McChrystal's explanations.
On June 10, 2009 Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made an impassioned plea on the Senate
floor to move on McChrystal‟s confirmation. Shortly afterward, the Senate approved President
Barack Obama's nomination of McChrystal with a voice vote by unanimous consent.
8.) “McChrystal assured the Senate Armed Services Committee that he had recommended
the Silver Star with the best of intentions, but he had been too hasty in the investigative
process.”
A “hasty … investigative process” had nothing to do with the false Silver Star. The Ranger
Battalion Commander LTC Bailey said, “Sir, within three or four hours of being out here on the
ground by the incident, I went back and I told [COL Nixon] that I was certain that we had killed
him. … In fact, I think just about everybody around knew that. And certainly, by the next day
when we did the investigations, I confirmed it. … So, after [CPT Scot 15-6 investigator] did his
first five interviews, he came back to me and said, “Sir, I’m certain. I’m sure.” And then I
called [COL Nixon]. … I think it was the 24th [of April]. . . . Gen. McChrystal was next in the
chain of command.
On April 29th, the day after sending up his Silver Star recommendation, Gen. McChrystal sent a
high-priority P4 memo to top generals supposedly “warning” them of the “potential” friendly fire
death of Pat Tillman. But, McChrystal testified he learned of friendly-fire on April 23rd. Then
why did he wait six days until he sent his “timely” P4 message? And knowing of confirmed
friendly-fire, why was all mention of that removed from the Silver Star citation and witness
statements?
And I don‟t understand how “the best of intentions” can explain the fabrication of two Silver Star
witness statements, a false Silver Star citation, etc.
9.) “McChrystal had signed off on the Silver Star recommendation that suggested Tillman
had been killed by the enemy, a choice he regretted. … I think he apologized for what he
did in this. But that whole thing is a sad chapter in Army history.
General McChrystal denied the phony narrative of a raging firefight was anything more sinister
than "mistakes" made to honor Tillman. "I didn't see any activity by anyone to deceive," he said.
"We failed the family. And I was a part of that." He earlier expressed his "deepest condolences"
to Tillman's family and fellow rangers. Mary Tillman said she neither accepts nor believes
McChrystal's apology. "McChrystal was lying," she said.
And McChrystal never actually apologized for orchestrating the cover-up. If McChrystal has
any “regrets” it‟s for any trouble the Tillman cover-up scandal resulted for him and his
reputation. I doubt he gives a damn about the never-ending heartache he‟s caused the Tillman
family over the years.
10.) “Well, they [Washington establishment] didn't.” [dig into McChrystal’s role in the
cover-up very much, just held some “pro forma” hearings]. … “
In the foreword to the paperback edition of her book, “Boots on the Ground by Dusk,” Mary
Tillman wrote,
“I had sent the President an email and a letter reminding him of McChrystal‟s
involvement in the cover-up of Pat‟s death. In the letter, I suggested McChrystal should
be “scrutinized very carefully” by the Senate Armed Services Committee. I also
contacted the staffs of Senator Patrick Leahy and Senator James Webb and expressed my
concerns. I had several conversations with members of the staffs of both senators, but it
was clear that neither senator wanted to get involved.”
“… I had always believed Pat‟s case was politically awkward for him [Senator McCain]
and so he‟d chosen to distance himself from the entire affair. … McCain was already
publicly endorsing the McChrystal appointment before the hearing even began. … Sadly,
McChrystal‟s promotion had been sanctioned long before the hearing. None of the
congressmen pressed McChrysal about Pat‟s case … or detainee abuse and torture at
Camp Nama …”
“Over the last five years, the Pentagon and Congress have had numerous opportunities to
hold accountable those responsible for the cover-up of Pat‟s death. Each time they‟ve
failed.”
“The Tillman Story illustrates the corruption, deception, and indifference that is systemic
in our government. … The cover-up of Pat‟s death was orchestrated at the very highest
levels of the Pentagon, and elsewhere in our government … the government didn‟t just
lie to us; it lied to a nation.”
...
At the end of his April 2007 Tillman hearing, Congressman Waxman stated in frustration, “What
we have is a very clear, deliberate abuse intentionally done. Why is it so hard to find out who
did it?”
Blaming the Bush administration and the Army for the cover-up is too simple. In reality, the
cover-up has been a thoroughly bipartisan affair, with the Democratic Congress and the Obama
Presidency continuing to protect General McChrystal. It wasn‟t just a case of the White House
stonewalling the Congress. It wasn‟t a lack of courage or will. It wasn‟t a loathing to call them
out on their bullshit. In actuality, Congress didn‟t just “fumble” the ball, they threw the game.
Congressman Waxman‟s so-called “investigation” was not an honest attempt to get at the truth.
The Committee blamed its‟ failure to uncover those responsible on stone-walling by the Bush
Administration. However, it‟s investigation” was perfunctory and failed to question Gen.
McChrystal about his key role in writing the fraudulent Silver Star, altered witness statements,
early knowledge of fratricide, failure to inform the family, and his deceptive P4 memo.
Waxman has never explained why McChrystal was permitted to “decline‟ to appear before his
committee and dropped from the hearing witness list (and there‟s a possibility McChrystal
testified during a secret closed hearing before the Committee).
During Spring 2008, Senator James Webb conducted such a secret “review” of McChrystal‟s
role for the Senate. Senator James‟s Webb betrayal of the Tillman family cuts me the deepest.
I‟ve trusted his sense of honor for thirty years. If anyone in Congress should have cared, it
would have been him. Webb, as a young Marine veteran, spent 8 years to clear the name of a
dead Marine for his mother‟s sake! I‟m hard on Webb not because I dislike the man, but that I‟m
disappointed in him. As an old man and politician, he‟s turned into exactly what he once reviled
as a young veteran!
On May 15th 2008, the Senate Armed Services Committee (headed by Senator Levin and
McCain) held a secret “executive session” where McChrystal testified behind closed doors about
his actions after Tillman‟s fratricide “in detail.” Shortly afterwards, the Senate promoted him to
Director of the Joint Staff.
The following year, on May 11th 2009, President Obama nominated McChrystal to be his new
commander of the Afghan War despite McChrystal‟s key role in the Tillman cover-up (two days
later, Obama gave the ASU commencement address at Sun Devil Stadium without once
mentioning Pat Tillman to avoid embarrassing questions).
On May 20th, Senators Lieberman, Graham, and McCain (working with the White House)
introduced a bill to change the FOIA law to block the release of photos that probably showed
detainee abuse by JSOC forces under McChrystal‟s command. The Senate unanimously passed
it the next day.
On June 2nd 2009, The Senate Armed Services Committee held General McChrystal‟s
confirmation hearing for his promotion to four-star general and Afghan war commander. The
hearing was strictly “pro-forma.” Senators Levin, McCain, and Webb didn't press McChrystal
aggressively. The real hearing had been conducted the previous year, behind closed doors.
General McChrystal‟s confirmation came only after the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
made an impassioned plea on the Senate floor. Shortly afterward, the Senate approved President
Barack Obama's nomination of McChrystal by unanimous consent.
...
It‟s not surprising that after the initial fratricide cover-up fell apart, Army officers and the Bush
administration lied to protect their careers. But the Democratic Congress, after they took control
of both Houses in 2006, could have gone after those responsible. Or at least not promoted them!
Just before the 2006 mid-term elections, Kevin Tillman published his eloquent letter, “After
Pat‟s Birthday”:
“Somehow our elected leaders were subverting international law and humanity by setting up
secret prisons around the world, secretly kidnapping people, secretly holding them
indefinitely, secretly not charging them with anything, secretly torturing them. Somehow
that overt policy of torture became the fault of a few “bad apples” in the military.”
“Somehow torture is tolerated. … Somehow lying is tolerated. … Somehow faking

character, virtue and strength is tolerated. … Somehow a narrative is more important than
reality.”
“Somehow American leadership, whose only credit is lying to its people and illegally
invading a nation, has been allowed to steal the courage, virtue and honor of its soldiers on
the ground. … Somehow the same incompetent, narcissistic, virtueless, vacuous, malicious
criminals are still in charge of this country. Somehow this is tolerated. Somehow nobody is
accountable for this.”
Kevin had hoped a Democratic Congress would bring accountability back to our country. But,
just as with warrantless wiretapping and torture, those responsible for the cover-up of his
brother‟s friendly-fire death have never been held accountable for their actions. As the Obama
administration is fond of saying, “They‟re moving forward, not looking backward.”
...
Bob Woodward’s Whitewash of McChrystal’s Role in the Tillman Cover-Up:
It appears to me that Bob Woodward‟s book “Obama‟s Wars” whitewashed Gen. McChrystal‟s
role in the Army‟s cover-up of Pat Tillman‟s friendly-fire death. Woodward wrote that
McChrystal merely “signed off” on the false Silver Star citation. However, the evidence
indicates that McChrystal actually directly supervised the writing of the false Silver Star and
orchestrated the cover-up on the ground in Afghanistan.
If I had the chance to question Woodward again, I would ask him: were you ignorant of the facts
of the Tillman story, did your high-level sources deceive you about McChrystal‟s role, or were
you whitewashing Gen. Stanley McChrystal‟s hands-on role in the cover-up of Pat Tillman
friendly-fire death?
“CLASHES WITH PENTAGON SHAPED
“OBAMA’S WARS”
Neal Conan Interview with Bob Woodward
(NPR’s Talk of the Nation, September 13, 2010)
NEAL CONAN, host:

This is TALK OF THE NATION. I'm Neal Conan in Washington.
Barack Obama ran for president on a promise to focus on the war in Afghanistan and initiated a
policy review as soon as he took office, then another a few months later. He's due to receive yet
another, later this week.
Over almost two years in office, the president's escalated U.S. troop levels twice, fired two
commanders and extended the timeline for U.S. combat operations to 2014, a process
documented by veteran journalist Bob Woodward in his most recent book. "Obama's Wars"
describes White House and military officials determined to get it right amid mutual distrust and
sometimes mutual incomprehension.
...
Part I: L’Affair Rolling Stan

I just happened to turn on the radio in the kitchen to do dishes when I heard NPR‟s Talk of the
Nation in progress with Bob Woodward. I went on the computer, got the phone number, then
quickly glanced at my “Obama‟s Wars” notes I had typed a couple of months previously.
Nothing (at the time) jumped out about what Woodward had written about the Tillman cover-up.
What the hell, I may as well try to get on. I called up, and I connected on the first try. Shit! I
don‟t even have a question! I got past Neal Conan‟s screening, and then quickly sketched out a
question in the few minutes before I was put on the air:
...
[At 17:50 minutes into program]
CONAN: We'll get David on the line from Grand Rapids, and then we'll go back to Ted. I
apologize, Ted. David, you're on the air. Go ahead, please.
DAVID (Caller): Yes, hi. Thanks for taking my call.
CONAN: Sure.
DAVID: Yeah, I was just wondering if Bob Woodward could elaborate a bit on the firing of
General Stanley McChrystal last June. When I read the book, his account seemed a little bit
sketchy and kind of hurried as to what actually transpired. He had mentioned a couple meetings I
think in April and May of this year [actually May 6 & 11], in which he had a “strike one” and
“strike two” against him.
And it just seems to me there's some sort of backstory, which wasn't elaborated upon in his book
or elsewhere.
Mr. WOODWARD: Well, there is the backstory of the fall, when General McChrystal
gave a speech in London indicating that he essentially had decided that we had to have a
counterinsurgency strategy that was fully resourced before the president had decided that
issue.
Not only General McChrystal but General Petraeus and others, including Admiral
Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, had kind of piled on well, this is the way we should
do it. And the White House went ballistic and said, now wait a minute, this is the
president's decision, the commander in chief's decision, and they felt they were being
boxed in or really kind of cornered by the uniformed military.
CONAN: And not just by that. There was a document, which you broke[9-21-09?], in which
General McChrystal says if we don't get essentially the troop levels I've asked for, we're going to
lose as soon as this year.
Mr. WOODWARD: That's right, we're going to have mission failure. And of course,
that was a real shock to the White House. And so, McChrystal's already got two strikes
against him and then there's the Rolling Stone article, which if you go back and read, has
a lot of McChrystal aides and a lot of nasty talk but really not - it really was not high on
the Richter Scale, as I look at it.
But there was a feeling in the White House that they had to show Obama was in charge.
And McChrystal realized he'd overstepped the line and I think was -quickly was telling
people I've compromised the mission. He called Vice President Biden and said I've
compromised the mission. And so in a sense, he almost fired himself.
...
Guy Montag’s Response to Woodward’s First Answer:

Woodward said, “McChrystal's already got two strikes against him and then there's the Rolling
Stone article, which if you go back and read … it really was not high on the Richter Scale, as I
look at it. But there was a feeling in the White House that they had to show Obama was in
charge.”
Perhaps McChrystal was fired “to show Obama was in charge.” He‟s fired several of his
appointees merely because of a comment that threatened to cause some political embarrassment.
I wouldn‟t be surprised that just the perception by others that Obama was once again being
“boxed in” by his generals was enough to let McChrystal go.
In a bizarre way, I actually had some “sympathy for the devil.” I agreed with Woodward that the
Rolling Stone article “really was not high on the Richter Scale.” Hardly a firing offense. If
McChrystal was really the best man to fight the Afghan War, it seems the President could‟ve put
the good of the war over political considerations.
I resented President Obama for firing McChrystal so lightly. Just last year, it appears the
President considered him such a “silver bullet” for the Afghan War that he overlooked
McChrystal‟s central role in Army‟s cover-up of Pat Tillman‟s friendly-fire death (and the
President even pushed through a law specifically to protect McChrystal from fallout from the
release of photos showing torture at Camp Nama). Letting McChrystal go over a minor incident
(instead of over the Pat Tillman cover-up) was, to my way of thinking, another insult to Pat
Tillman‟s memory.
...
Guy Montag’s Response to Woodward’s Remarks:

Bob Woodward either dodged or misunderstood my question. I knew the “back story of the fall”
with the “London speech.” My question concerned the two high-level meetings that McChrystal
held with the President on May 6th & 11th (the second with McChrystal showing up in-person)
about the progress (or lack thereof) in Afghanistan.
Curiously, Woodward said nothing in his book about what was discussed in those two meetings,
other than McChrystal got a “strike one” and “strike two”. Either his sources held out on him,
or Woodward was holding back in his book.
Probably, it was a combination of the Afghan war not doing so well and the perception of once
again “boxing in” Obama that got McChrystal fired. If McChrystal was clearly winning the war,
I think he would still be there.
Politically it worked. Obama showed that he was “in charge”, punished McChrystal for once
again “boxing him in” (if he believed that was the case), and punished Gen. Petreaus for “boxing
him in” by demoting him from CENTCOM and handing him the tar-baby of the Afghan War
(“COIN‟s the trick, we‟ll be drawing down in a year? OK, now it‟s your baby).
Some have speculated that McChrystal set himself up for a fall by intentionally having his staff
say embarrassing stuff. For example, here‟s “Pave Low John”‟s take on the matter:
“Even McChrystal, god help us, pussed out in the end. Does anyone here REALLY think
a crafty old operator like Stan the Man had no idea how stupid it was to let a Rolling
Stone reporter watch his staff get hammered in Paris? He wanted out of the hot seat, plain
and simple, and he used that douchebag reporter to do it. Now he can shrug and claim
he's not a 'quitter' if the whole thing falls apart in the next couple of years.”
I wouldn‟t dismiss that line of thought out of hand. Micheal Hastings said in a radio interview
that he had interviewed dozens of generals without having them (and their staff) talk so loosely.
And remember, McChrystal did a stint early in the war as a Pentagon spokeman, spent time as
the Director of the Joint Staff. As a general, he was no naïve waif to the ways of journalists.
And, remember the precedence of Admiral Fallon being fired from command of CENTCOM for
remarks he made that appeared in a Vanity Fair profile a few years ago.
...
Part II: Woodward’s Whitewash of Gen. McChrystal’s Role In the

Cover-Up of Pat Tillman’s Friendly-Fire Death
As I‟m listening to Bob Woodward not actually answer my question, my first instinct was to ask
a follow-up. But, as I wait, I realize I should have asked him something about the Tillman
cover-up. But, what question to ask to put him on the spot, “to throw my shoe at him”? At the
time, I couldn‟t think of one.
Unfortunately, I just tried to wing it. And I was a bit nervous:
...
[20:08 minutes into program]
CONAN: David, thanks very much for the call.
DAVID: Thank you. Could I just say one more quick comment?
CONAN: Sure.
DAVID:
It … seems like McChrystal's central role in the cover-up of Pat Tillman's
friendly-fire death was … passed over a bit in your book.
He was apparently one of the favorites of Chief Mullen. But looking at it quite a bit
myself, … you had some stuff going on, like in May 15, 2008, an executive session
hearing of the Senate after Senator Webb did an investigation, “so-called”, of his role.
And that … seemed to be passed over by the Washington establishment … they did a
“pro forma” hearings at various times but really didn't dig into that very much.
And I just wondered if you could comment
Mr. WOODWARD:
Well, they [Washington establishment] didn't [dig into McChrystal‟s role in the Tillman
cover-up very much].
And, of course, McChrystal was in the chain of command, and I think he apologized for
what he did in this.
But he was not the hands-on person making that decision.
But that whole thing is a sad chapter in Army history.
...
Guy Montag’s Response to Woodward’s Remarks about McChrystal’s Role:
1.) “Well, they [Washington establishment] didn't [dig into it very much].”
“Well, they [Washington establishment] didn't.” [dig into McChrystal’s role in the cover-
up, they held some “pro forma” hearings]. … “
In the foreword to the paperback edition of her book, Mary Tillman wrote, Boots on the Ground
by Dusk:
“I had sent the President an email and a letter reminding him of McChrystal‟s
involvement in the cover-up of Pat‟s death. In the letter, I suggested McChrystal should
be “scrutinized very carefully” by the Senate Armed Services Committee. I also
contacted the staffs of Senator Patrick Leahy and Senator James Webb and expressed my
concerns. I had several conversations with members of the staffs of both senators, but it
was clear that neither senator wanted to get involved.”
“… I had always believed Pat‟s case was politically awkward for him [Senator McCain]
and so he‟d chosen to distance himself from the entire affair. … McCain was already
publicly endorsing the McChrystal appointment before the hearing even began. … Sadly,
McChrystal‟s promotion had been sanctioned long before the hearing. None of the
congressmen pressed McChrysal about Pat‟s case … or detainee abuse and torture at
Camp Nama …”
“Over the last five years, the Pentagon and Congress have had numerous opportunities to
hold accountable those responsible for the cover-up of Pat‟s death. Each time they‟ve
failed.”
“The Tillman Story illustrates the corruption, deception, and indifference that is systemic
in our government. … The cover-up of Pat‟s death was orchestrated at the very highest
levels of the Pentagon, and elsewhere in our government … the government didn‟t just
lie to us; it lied to a nation.”
...
At the end of his April 2007 hearing, Congressman Waxman stated in frustration, “What we
have is a very clear, deliberate abuse intentionally done. Why is it so hard to find out who did
it?”
Blaming the Bush administration and the Army for the cover-up is too simple. In reality, the
cover-up has been a thoroughly bipartisan affair, with the Democratic Congress and the Obama
Presidency continuing to protect General McChrystal. It wasn‟t just a case of the White House
stonewalling the Congress. It wasn‟t a lack of courage or will. It wasn‟t a loathing to call them
out on their bullshit. In actuality, Congress didn‟t just “fumble” the ball, they threw the game.
Congressman Waxman‟s so-called “investigation” was not an honest attempt to get at the truth.
The Committee blamed its‟ failure to uncover those responsible on stone-walling by the Bush
Administration. However, it‟s investigation” was perfunctory and failed to question Gen.
McChrystal about his key role in writing the fraudulent Silver Star, altered witness statements,
early knowledge of fratricide, failure to inform the family, and his deceptive P4 memo.
Waxman has never explained why McChrystal was allowed to “decline” to testify and dropped
from the hearing witness list (and I just discovered that McChrystal possibley testified during a
secret closed hearing before the Committee).
During Spring 2008, Senator James Webb conducted a secret “review” of McChrystal‟s role.
Senator James‟s Webb betrayal of the Tillman family cuts me the deepest. I‟ve trusted his sense
of honor for thirty years. If anyone in Congress should have cared, it would have been him.
Webb, as a young Marine veteran, spent 8 years to clear the name of a dead Marine for his
mother‟s sake! I‟m hard on Webb not because I dislike the man, but that I‟m disappointed in
him. As an old man and politician, he‟s turned into exactly what he once reviled as a young
veteran!
On May 15th 2008, the Senate Armed Services Committee (headed by Senator Levin and
McCain) held an “executive session” where McChrystal testified behind closed doors about his
actions after Tillman‟s fratricide “in detail.” Shortly afterwards, the Senate promoted him to
Director of the Joint Staff.
The following year, on May 11th 2009, President Obama handpicked McChrystal to be his new
commander of the Afghan War despite McChrystal‟s key role in the Tillman cover-up (two days
later, Obama gave the ASU commencement address at Sun Devil Stadium without once
mentioning Pat Tillman to avoid embarrassing questions).
On May 20th, Senators Lieberman, Graham, and McCain (working with the White House)
introduced a bill to change the FOIA law to block the release of photos showing detainee abuse
by JSOC forces under McChrystal‟s command. The Senate unanimously passed it the next day.
On June 2nd 2009, The Senate Armed Services Committee held General McChrystal‟s
confirmation hearing for his promotion to four-star general and Afghan war commander. The
hearing was strictly “pro-forma.” Senators Levin, McCain, and Webb didn't press McChrystal
aggressively. The real hearing had been conducted the previous year, behind closed doors.
General McChrystal‟s confirmation came only after the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
made an impassioned plea on the Senate floor. Shortly afterward, the Senate approved President
Barack Obama's nomination of McChrystal by unanimous consent.
...
It‟s not surprising that after the initial fratricide cover-up fell apart, Army officers and the Bush
administration lied to protect their careers. But the Democratic Congress, after they took control
of both Houses in 2006, could have gone after those responsible. Or at least not promoted them!
Just before the 2006 mid-term elections, Kevin Tillman published his eloquent letter, “After
Pat‟s Birthday”:
“Somehow our elected leaders were subverting international law and humanity by setting up
secret prisons around the world, secretly kidnapping people, secretly holding them
indefinitely, secretly not charging them with anything, secretly torturing them. Somehow
that overt policy of torture became the fault of a few “bad apples” in the military.”
“Somehow torture is tolerated. … Somehow lying is tolerated. … Somehow faking
character, virtue and strength is tolerated. … Somehow a narrative is more important than
reality.”
“Somehow American leadership, whose only credit is lying to its people and illegally
invading a nation, has been allowed to steal the courage, virtue and honor of its soldiers on
the ground. … Somehow the same incompetent, narcissistic, virtueless, vacuous, malicious
criminals are still in charge of this country. Somehow this is tolerated. Somehow nobody is
accountable for this.”
Kevin had hoped a Democratic Congress would bring accountability back to our country. But,
just as with warrantless wiretapping and torture, those responsible for the cover-up of his
brother‟s friendly-fire death have never been held accountable for their actions. As the Obama
administration is fond of saying, “They‟re moving forward, not looking backward.”
2.) “… McChrystal was in the chain of command, and I think he apologized for what he
did in this.”
way up the chain of command.
And, in response to President Obama‟s May 2009 nomination of Gen. McChrystal as Afghan
war commander, Mary Tillman wrote in her book, “Boots on the Ground by Dusk”: “Not only
is he [McChrystal] lying about the circumstances surrounding Pat‟s death, … he is proposing
false language for the Silver Star narrative.”
Note: Krakauer's account was largely based upon McChrystal‟s own testimony during his June
2, 2009 Senate confirmation hearing and from DOD IG interviews with Gen. McChrystal, COL
Nixon, LTC Kauzlarich, and LTC Bailey obtained by FOIA.
...
Gen. McChrystal never actually apologized for orchestrating the cover-up. If McChrystal has
any “regrets” it‟s for any trouble the Tillman cover-up scandal resulted for him and his
reputation. I doubt he gives a damn about the never-ending heartache he‟s caused the Tillman
family over the years.
Instead, McChrystal denied that the phony narrative of a raging firefight was anything more
sinister than "mistakes" made to honor Tillman. "I didn't see any activity by anyone to deceive,"
he said. "We failed the family. And I was a part of that." He earlier expressed his "deepest
condolences" to Tillman's family and fellow rangers. Mary Tillman said she neither accepts nor
believes McChrystal's apology. "McChrystal was lying," she said.
3.) “But he was not the hands-on person making that decision.”
Not the “hands on person”! Actually, Gen. McChrystal directly supervised the Army‟s cover-up.
way up the chain of command. Jon Krakauer in his book, "Where Men Win Glory" (pp. 334 –
347 paperback edition), described how Gen. McChrystal had "orchestrate[d] what can only be
described as a broad conspiracy to conceal Tillman's fratricide ..."
...
What “decision”? The decision to cover up Pat Tillman‟s friendly-fire death and award him a
false Silver Star? I agree with Woodward that McChrystal didn‟t make “that decision” to cover-
up Tillman‟s death. However, McChrystal was the “hands on” general who supervised the
cover-up on the ground in Afghanistan and made it happen.
Who made “that decision”? Well, during the Bush administration, McChrystal commanded
JSOC special operation forces from 2003 to 2008 that often acted outside the military chain of
command “doing things the executive branch -- read: [Vice President] Cheney and [Secretary of
Defense] Rumsfeld -- wanted it to do.” It certainly appears that Rumsfeld and Cheney gave
McChrystal his marching orders… Perhaps President Bush was in the loop as well to some
extent. How much does Bob Woodward know about Rumsfeld and Cheney‟s role that he‟s not
telling?
Part III: “Throwing My Shoe at Bob Woodward … Not”
Bob Woodward had responded,"... of course, McChrystal was in the chain of command, ... But
he was not the hands-on person making that decision...." What! Gen. McChrystal was not the
“hands on“guy? Of course, I didn‟t have the chance to try to sneak in yet another follow-up
question.
Here‟s the question I should have asked Bob Woodward, to “throw my shoe at him” o put the
leading inside Washington journalist on the spot about the Tillman case:
In your book, “Obama‟s Wars” (p.154), you wrote that Gen. McChrystal had merely "...
signed off on the Silver Star recommendation that suggested Tillman had been killed by
the enemy ..."
However, Jon Krakauer in his book, "Where Men Win Glory" (pp. 334 – 347 paperback
edition), described how Gen. McChrystal personally "administered the medal
recommendation process" with a false narrative that "was painstakingly written to create
the impression Pat Tillman was killed by enemy fire" and directly supervised the Ranger
RGT officers who altered the two Silver Star witness statements. The Silver Star
recommendation was "fraudulent" by "any objective measure."
Instead of merely having "signed off" on a piece of paper that landed on his desk, Gen.
McChrystal had "orchestrate[d] what can only be described as a broad conspiracy to
conceal Tillman's fratricide ..."
And, in response to President Obama‟s May 2009 nomination of Gen. McChrystal as

Afghan war commander, Mary Tillman wrote in her book, “Boots on the Ground by
Dusk”: “Not only is he [McChrystal] lying about the circumstances surrounding Pat‟s
death, … he is proposing false language for the Silver Star narrative.”
Mr. Woodward, my question for you is: were you ignorant of these facts of the Tillman
story, did your high-level sources deceive you, or were you whitewashing Gen. Stanley
McChrystal‟s hands-on role in the cover-up of Pat Tillman friendly-fire death?
...
Whitewash, could have shook the tree a bit
******* not ready throwing my shoe … not missing.

11-02-10 [revised 1-27-11]
“OBAMA’S WARS”
(Bob Woodward, 2010 hardcover)
Woodward’s Portrayal of McChrystal’s Role in the Tillman Cover-Up:
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Adm. Michael Mullen revered Gen. McChrystal, and had made him
director of the Joint Staff – his previous assignment – in part so that the 2008 Senate
confirmation could wipe away the role McChrystal had played in the cover-up of the 2004
friendly-fire death in Afghanistan of Pat Tillman. …”Of course, McChrystal was in the chain of
command. But he was not the hands-on person making that decision” … McChrystal had
signed off*on the Silver Star recommendation that suggested Tillman had been killed by the
enemy, a choice he regretted.
McChrystal was essentially the chairman‟s deputy. Director of the Joint Staff was the premier
current Army chief Gen Casey.
Mullen realized that the solution to Afghanistan was right before his eyes. On Monday May 11,
2009 Defense Secretary Gates announced McChrystal would be the new commander. A week
later, Obama met for 10 minutes in the Oval Office with McChrystal.
The Pat Tillman issue resurfaced during McChrystal‟s confirmation hearings for ISAF. On
Tuesday June 2, 2009, McChrystal sat down for his Senate confirmation hearing. McChrystal
assured the Senate Armed Services Committee that he had recommended the Silver Star with the
best of intentions, but he had been too hasty in the investigative process … “and I think he
apologized for what he did in this.”
“Well, they [Washington establishment] didn't.” [dig into McChrystal‟s role in the cover-up very
much, just held some “pro forma” hearings]. … “But that whole thing is a sad chapter in Army
history.”
*Citation: p. 154 McChrystal had signed off: Ann Scott Tyson, “9 Officers Blamed in
Note: This description compiled using quotes from “Obama‟s Wars” and NPR‟s Talk of the
Nation 12-13-10). My detailed rebuttal of Woodward‟s portrayal is found in “Bob Woodward‟s
Whitewash of Gen. McChrystal‟s Role in the Tillman Cover-Up”.
May 2008: Promotion of Gen. McChrystal to Director of the Joint Staff:
32 [Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Michael] Mullen was a 1968 graduate of the Naval
Academy at Annapolis. Note: the same year as Senator James Webb. Webb was a friend of
National Security Director Jim Jones (former Marine). Webb acquaintance with Mullen?
85 For the past five months [from before a “few days after inaugural 1-09; July 2008],
McChrystal had served as director of the Joint Staff of the Joint Chiefs, a high-profile job in
which he interacted daily with Chairman Mullen and, often, Secretary Gates.
154 Mullen revered McChrystal, and had made him director of the Joint Staff – his previous
assignment – in part so that the Senate confirmation [May 2008] could wipe away the role
McChrystal had played in the cover-up of the 2004 friendly-fire death in Afghanistan of Pat
Tillman Note: there was no discussion about McChrystal during the public 5-22-08
confirmation hearing for Gen. Petreaus; a secret closed executive session was held 5-15-08
where McChrystal testified in detail about the Tillman case and Camp Nama torture]
82 Clinton joined the Armed Services Committee. Note: Was she on for McChrystal‟s
2008 promotion?
154 … McChrystal had signed off on the Silver Star recommendation that suggested Tillman
had been killed by the enemy, a choice he regretted
Note: “Suggested”? McChrystal played the central hands-on role in the Tillman cover-up! He
personally directed the writing of the fraudulent Silver Star and apparently the altering of two
witness statements.
Woodward describes the Army‟s actions as of “coverup” yet the title of his WP citation says “…
No Coverup Found”. So which is it? What else does Woodward know?
“Signed off”? The cited WP article doesn‟t say that; it says McChrystal submitted a Silver Star
recommendation with “inaccurate information [e.g. two fabricated witness statements] and a
misleading citiation [i.e. totally false, except for getting his name right]”
403 *Citation: 154 McChrystal had signed off: Ann Scott Tyson, “9 Officers Blamed in
...
Excerpts from 9 Officers Blamed in Tillman Death, but No Coverup Found
A Pentagon investigation found yesterday that four senior Army officers -- including a three-star
general [Stanley McChrystal] now in charge of the military's most elite man-hunting units --
committed "critical errors" in judgment in handling the "friendly fire" death of Cpl. Pat Tillman,
a former pro football star. …
The report by the Pentagon inspector general recommended that four Army generals and five
lower-ranking officers face "corrective action" for serious violations, including making false and
misleading statements about what they knew about the Tillman fratricide, as well as inaccuracies
in recommending Tillman, 27, for a Silver Star, the Army's third-highest combat award. …
[Col.] Nixon [Commander of the Ranger RGT], along with Lt. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who
was the joint task force commander, were responsible for submitting a Silver Star
recommendation for Tillman that included "inaccurate information [among other things, two
fabricated witness statements] and a misleading [i.e. filled with lies] citation that implied
[anyone reading it would assume he was KIA] CPL Tillman died by enemy fire," the report
found. …
Despite finding several errors, the report did not find evidence of a coverup. "There was a series
of mistakes made. We never decided that there was any attempt to cover up," because the
friendly-fire investigation was started quickly, said Thomas F. Gimble, acting Pentagon inspector
general.
...
Note: On July 31, 2007 Secretary of the Army Pete Geren held a news conference to present the
findings of Gen. Wallace who recommended “corrective action” for the officers who made
“mistakes” in the Tillman case. Gen. Kensinger, already retired, was the designated scapegoat
and lost one of his stars (i.e. lost about $10K from his pension).
None of the other officers involved got even so much as a letter of reprimand in their file. In
fact, they have all been promoted since then: Gen. McChrystal twice, Nixon to general, Bailey
to general, Kauzlarich to full bird colonel.
June 2009: Gen. McChrystal’s Promotion to Afghan War Commander:
82 A few days after the inaugural … [retired Gen.] Keane … known as the father of the Iraq
surge … played effectively behind the scenes … for the promotions of Gen. David Petreaus …
He told Clinton … McKiernan , the Afghanistan commander, was the wrong man for the job
…The only way out of Afghanistan … was an intensive counterinsurgency …”I think he should
be fired …”
85 The officer Keane had in mind was Gen. Lloyd Austin III, the second in command in
Iraq, but he needed a rest. “There‟s another guy named McChrystal.”
118 The chairman of the Joint Chiefs [Mullen] realized that the solution to Afghanistan was
right before his eyes,… McChrystal had been director of the Joint Staff for more than seven
months. The Joint Staff director was essentially the chairman‟s deputy. It was the premier
current Army chief Gen Casey. Note: Gen. Abizaid perjured himself before Congress about his
knowledge of the Tillman fratricide.
118 Gates, who often worked with McChrystal, agreed he was the man for the job. He and
Mullen told the President they wanted to replace McKiernan. Obama said he would approve
whoever the secretary and Mullen recommended.
119 On Monday May 11, 2009 … Gate‟s voice quivered slightely as he announced that
McChrystal would be the new Afghanistan commander. … Note: Obama reversed his decision
to release torture photos on May 12, 2009, apparently to protect Gen. McChrystal‟s from his role
in torture at Camp Nama. Senator Lindsey Graham (regular meetings with Petreaus & Mullen)
introduced bill Senate unamimously passed on May 20 to prevent court-ordered release.
120 A week later, Obama met for 10 minutes in the Oval Office with McChrystal. … “Well,
it was ultimately my decision.” But he was relying on Gate‟s and Mullen‟s judgment. They felt
the fest person to do the job at this stage was Gen. McChrystal,” Obama said. “I had not had a
person-to-person conversation with him.”
123 On Tuesday June 2 [2009], McChrystal sat down for his Senate confirmation hearing. …
154 The issue [Pat Tillman cover-up] resurfaced during McChrystal‟s confirmation hearings
for ISAF. McChrystal assured the Senate Armed Services Committee that he had recommended
the Silver Star with the best of intentions, but he had been too hasty in the investigative process.
Note: strictly pro-forma hearing; real hearing held behind closed doors in 2008.
Sept – Oct 2009: Obama Felt “Boxed-In” by McChrystal, Petraeus, Mullen:
153 The Pentagon received McChrystal‟s classified assessment of the Afghanistan War on
Monday, August 31.
158 It angered Obama that Petraeus was publicly lobbying [9-02-09 Ignatius column] and
prejudging a presidential decision.
159 The White House was upset because it looked like the generals were trying to box in the
president. … So Pretreus went to ground, but … he hinted that the South Carolina Republican
[Lindsey Graham] ought to weigh in publicly.
205 Oct 6: Petraeus and Senator Lindsey Graham had one of their regular conversations …
Around this time,Mullen also paid Graham a visit.
213 Oct. 8: Even with 80K troops, the US could only protect 60% of the population. A full
counterinsurgency was impossible with these options.
232 Oct. 9: Obama: “We have to show a plan that will actually enable us to show progress.
..” … “I appreciate not reading about the meetings in the Washington Post”
171 In the message war, Petraeus had allies outside the administration … On September 14
[2009], a long op-ed appeared in the WSJ written by Senators Graham, Lieberman and McCain.
172 But when Obama heard about Mullen‟s testimony [9-15-09], … Mullen was publicly
endorsing the McChrystal strategy … The chairman was poking his finger in the president‟s eye.
… The generals and admirals are systematically playing him, boxing him in.
182 Woodward publishes the leaked McChrystal‟s assessment in the Wash Post 9-21-09. …
[appeared on CNAS Exum blog same day] „This highly classified document was artfully leaked
by those who wish to „bulldoze‟ Obama …”
...
196 [National Security Director Jim] Jones was dumbfounded by McChrystal. How could he
give such a [London October 1, 2009] speech and answer so categorically while the president
sought alternative strategies? The whole thing amazed him, particularly after the White House
had scolded Mullen and Petreaus for their comments weeks earlier.
The NS adviser told Gates that McChrystal‟s speech was an over-the-top moment and the
president had demonstrated a lot of restraint. “You‟ve simply got to stop this or the President is
going to have to fire somebody.” … He called Admiral Mullen, McChrystal‟s biggest booster.
“I don‟t know what you guys are doing.” … McChrystal‟s speech was either “insubordination or
stupid.” It read like a direct challenge to the president. “It is a firing offense, but McChrystal
won‟t be fired because we need him,” Jones said. Referring to Mullen and Petraeus, Jones said,
“One of you is going to get fired and I‟m going to recommend it.”
197 … the president raised McChrystal‟s remarks. This was something that really put me in a
box, Obama said, and I don‟t like to be boxed in. … Obama felt disrespected and trapped. The
White House saw the [10-01-09] speech as a scheme on the part of McChrystal, Mullen, and
Petraeus.
194 [10-02-09 Obama met with McChrystal after speech] “I like him. I think he‟s a good
man.” McChrystal was the right man for the job, he said …”
Nov -- Dec 2009 – Obama OK’s 30,000 Troop Afghan War “Surge”:
291 Nov. 23: “If the two-year time frame for accomplishing these goals is not possible, I
want to hear it now.”
Note: same day that CNAS‟s Andrew Exum “retired” from blogging. Trying to avoid more
fall-out from his WashPost book review.
318: Nov 28: “How many of these guys who are pushing that option are going to be here to see
the effects by July of 2011” Lute lamented to Donilon. .. “So,” Lute summarized, “the bottom
line is, you‟re left with the President standing here, owning this thing that these guys sold to him
but who have since exited stage right.”
319 “I don‟t see how you can defy your military chain here … if you tell McChrystal … I‟ve
chosen to do something else, you‟re going to have to replace him. … And then where does that
stop?” The colonel [Tien] did not have to elaborate. His implication was that not only
McChrystal, but Petraeus, Mullen and even Gates might go …”
322 Lute felt that the military establishment was really rolling the president … It wasn‟t
deliberate on McChrystal‟s part. As far as Lute could tell, McChrystal didn‟t have a
conspiratorial bone in his body. If there was someone trying to roll Obama, it was Petraeus. But
he had done so subtly and with a light touch. … a President did have choices, and in this case
his had been significantly limited …
Note: “conspiratory bone” referring to leak to pressure on troop surge, not Tillman case. Lute
quote referred to by Andrew Exum in Oct? blog, but failed to mention Donilon‟s comment
below. Did Petraeus leak assessment in Sept?
323 For his part, Donilon was hugely skeptical of the entire uniformed military chain of
command. McChrystal was hardly an innocent. He took command, got out first by writing his
long, classified assessment, staking his ground and then hiding behind the uniform and the flag.
Petraeus and Mullen had joined in after that.
...
324 Nov. 29: Obama issues his six-page terms sheet outlining his decision.
325 Turning to Petreaus, he [Obama] said, “Don‟t clear and hold what you cannot transfer.
Don‟t overextend us.”… If you have any personal misgivings or any professional doubts about
what we‟re about to do, tell me now …”
329 “I want to be clear about what we are not doing. This is not a nationwide
counterinsurgency strategy.” … “The first reassessment will be in December 2010.” … “That
assessment … will only be about the flexibility in how we draw down, not if we draw down.”
332 Biden believed the president had put a stake in the heart of expansive counterinsurgency.
… Petreaus saw it differently. Counterinsurgency was alive and well. … “I don‟t think you win
this war. I think you keep fighting. …”
338 “All we have to do is begin to show progress,” Petreaus said, “and that‟ll be sufficient to
add time to the clock and we‟ll get what we need [?more troops beyond 30K?].” “That‟s a
dramatic misreading of this president”, Lute said.
...
334 Dec. 1 West Point speech: He [Obama] announced he was sending 30,000 more US
troops. … “begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011 … we will execute
this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground.”
338 Lute … surmised the following: … Obama had to do this 18-month surge just to
demonstrate, in effect, that it couldn‟t be done …. Obama would have given the monolithic
military its day in court and the United States would not be seen as having been driven off the
battlefield.
May 2010: Gen. McChrystal Gets “Strike One” & “Strike Two”:
346 April 3: [Derek] Harvey [Petraeus‟s intelligence advisor, speaking to Petreaus] drew one
of the most pessimistic pictures possible of the war. … “It is not going to work. We‟re not going
to achieve the objectives that we‟ve set ourselves … On the ground he said, McChrystal‟s forces
had not finished clearing key areas. … the Taliban senior leadership thought they were doing
okay, even with the surge of 30,000 more US troops.
348 On April 16, the president met with the NSC … McChrystal had committed his forces to
clearing and holding operations because the ANSF weren‟t ready to hold the territory
themselves. It was bogging down the model of clear, hold, build and transfer. … Obama asked,
by the way, what about the areas we cleared in the summer of 2009? … Any of them close to
transferring? Not a single one, sir. The model had become clear, hold, hold, hold, and hold.
Hold for years. There was no build, no transfer. Petreaus said they were misconstruing the
approach for beginning a transfer. …. “It‟s not hand off, it‟s thin out.”
349 During the President‟s Thursday, May 6, secure video with McChrystal for the 90-minute
monthly review … the operation to gain full control of the city was beginning that month. It was
impossible to escape the conclusion that Kandahar would be a litmus test for the war …
350 One item [from briefing papers, with loaded questions] was, “I got the diagnosis of the
problem, and I see what you‟re prescribing for a cure, but the two don‟t connect. The dots don‟t
connect.” Why? Perhaps it was too stark and confrontational. He didn‟t ask it.
351 He [Obama] said he wanted sustainable progress and was still thinking about transfer.
“Be careful we don‟t start something for which we don‟t have resources to enable completion.”
… Afterward, the president indicated to several close aides that the briefing had a clarifying
effect on him. “What makes us think … that given the description of the problem, that we‟re
going to design a solution to this?”
… if you‟re not fully satisfied with Gen. McChrystal‟s description here, he will be in
Washington next week. You should invite him to come see you and continue the discussion in a
smaller, more intimate setting. In other words, if the meeting had amounted to a “strike one” for
the commanding general, the president ought to give McChrystal another swing. He agreed.
353 May 10: Holbrooke asked if there was an Afghan example of “clear, hold, build, and
transfer” actually happening. Not yet, McChrystal said…. No, we‟re not ready yet. … Marja …
after all that work and firepower McChrystal was saying they weren‟t ready to transfer sole
responsibility to a single Afghan company.
354 On May 11, the president took Donilon and Lute up on their proposal that McChrystal be
invited to continue the discussion. Obama assembled a small group in the Oval Office to hear
the Afghanistan commander. It included Biden, Gates, Mullen, Jones, Donilon and Colonel John
Tien, the NSC Afghanistan director … Tien was a COINista at heart … but he also saw reason
for skepticism. After the session, Lute who had missed the White House meeting …, caught up
with Col Tien. “John,” Lute asked, “how did Stan do?” “Strike two,” Tien said.
Note: Curiously, Woodward provided no details of this meeting with a 2nd strike against
McChrystal (Woodward had talked to most of those guys before). What happened during that
key meeting? Was McChrystal‟s lack of progress a big factor in his being fired just a month
later? I tried asking Woodward on NPR about this, but he merely talked about the London
speech.
190 “Counterterrorist decapitation doesn‟t work unless it is enabled by effective

counterinsurgency. They complement each other” [McChrystal, 9-30-09 during troop request
review]
355 The Biden pillar – the counterrrorism portion of the decision – was the one that was
really producing. McChrystal had tripled the number of JSOC teams, and the CIA‟s
Counterterrorism Pursuit Teams … were having superb results … despite the lack of the troop
density Petraeus had insisted would be necessary for successful counterterrorism.
356 Maybe the landing zone was not through the COINista‟s clear, hold, build and transfer?
358 May 14: “Larry [Nicholson],” Lute said, “forget Marja, this year‟s adventure. Let‟s go to
last year‟s adventure. So now we‟re at the 12-month mark. So tell me”…”Where are we in
Nawa in this four-step model that leads to „T‟ transfer” … “At least another 12 months.” And
that was for the best district. … “if that‟s as good as it gets, then we can‟t connect the dots here.”
360 “If Nawa is on – the best case – a 24 month timeline,” Lute said, “we‟re screwed. We‟re
not going to demonstrate progress this year.” … for this year‟s version in Marja, McChrystal was
advertising an improvement … when you dug into the numbers the reality was very different. …
Can pretty much predict that Kandahar‟s going to look a lot like it looks today. There‟s no
reason to work the weekends in November. We might as well do it during the workday in May
and June. … The president had directed that the military not go anywhere unless they could
transfer in 18 to 24 months … “Well, the best case, with big caveats, the guy on the ground is
saying 24 months. … this is a house of cards.”
June 2010: President Obama Fires McChrystal, Replaces with Petreaus:
370 By May 2010, President Obama was telling Jones and others, „isn‟t it about time to get
rid of Blair?” There had been too many fights with the CIA… May 20: Fire me, Blair [DNI]
basically said. That‟s exactly what Obama did.
38 He [Obama] was unsentimental and ruthless.
...
371 About 5 PM on June 21, Gates called Jones, “There‟s an article coming out in Rolling
Stone that‟s not very good about McChrystal.” … It contained some disparaging and mocking
comments from McChrystal and his senior staff about administration officials. … McChrystal
himself was quoted as saying that Obama‟s strategy review was “painful” and “I was selling an
unsellable position.”
372 Gates said he planned to release a statement reprimanding McChrystal, but hoped to
salvage the situation and avoid a setback to the war stategy. … Jones {NSC director] told Gates
that protecting McChrystal was noble. “But you don‟t want to put yourself between him and the
President.” Gates proposed that he issue the first two paragraphs of his statement criticizing
McChrystal …
373 The next day [June 23] Obama accepted McChrystal‟s resignation, and he proposed that
Petraeus take over. Though it would involve a technical demotion because as central
commander Petraeus was the boss, it was an idea that would address both the military and
political problems. The Iraq hero would come to the rescue of Afghanistan. … I noted it was a
demotion. “He certainly doesn‟t consider it a demotion,” the president said.
Note: Woodward‟s 12-13-2010 NPR Talk of the Nation response seemed to be that his opinion
was McChrystal‟s actions weren‟t that bad, but Obama felt he had to act lest it looked as though
McChrystal was boxing him in again.
June 2010: Gen. Petraeus Becomes the “Face” of the Afghan War
16 Petraeus was the recipient of countless awards, and the celebrity selected to do the coin
toss at the upcoming [2009] Superbowl. [Note: see my post “Barely a Footnote”] … Obama‟s
campaign aides saw his prominence through a political lens. A popular war hero like Petraeus, a
registered Republican, was always a potential presidential candidate.
16 But Obamaland was potentially hostile. When candidate Obama had visited Iraq oer the
summer, the conversation between the two had not gone well. … The Obama presidency was
going to dramatically alter Petraeus‟s status. He had direct access to President Bush, and his
mentor, retired Gen. Jack Keane [, the former vice chief of staff of the Army, had an
extraordinary pipeline to both Bush and Vice President Cheney.
379 The Afghanistan War was now in Gen. Petraeus‟s hands. Jones, for one, knew how bad
the situation was and thought Petraeus was probably saying to himself, “What have I gotten
myself into?”… If Jones had the job … he knew exactly what he would say to Obama … …The
Taliban was taking full advantage of the safe havens … in those circumstances, „You can‟t win.
You can‟t do counterinsurgency. It is a cancer in the plan.”
379 …But history had its cycles and ironies, he [Petreaus] knew all too well. … When he
arrived there [in Iraq] … “What in the world?” he thought to himself that day in 2007 and on a
number of occasions later. “Why didn‟t I just take that Afghanistan job”?
263 Nov. 9: Newsweek had put him [Petreaus] on its cover when he took over that command
[Iraq], asking in its headline: “Can This Man Save Iraq?” The implied question bouncing
around the Situation Room was: “Can this man save Afghanistan”
17 He was no expert on Afghanistan, but he had gone there four years earlier [2005] … On
this November trip [2008] he saw firsthand the lack of troops … His bottom line was that
without more troops, money and attention, “We‟re not going to achieve our objectives.”
Petraeus told his closest aides that Afghanistan would be different from Iraq, where he had
become the poster boy of the war. “I do not want to be the face of policy. They can’t dump it on
me. Petraeus later deined this was his intent. He just wanted to be “a good soldier,” as he put it,
and keep a very low public profile.
Note: Was Petreaus demoted for promising more than could deliver with COIN and again
boxing Obama in? And punished by sticking him with the “tar baby” of the Afghan War? (But,
is Pretreaus sticking Obama by now saying the “thin-out” will be in 2014 vs. 2011?) Is
Woodward not spelling things out to avoid contradicting Obama‟s public statements and to
maintain his access?
CNAS’s Andrew Exum Tours Afghanistan by Periscope:
403 Members of McChrystal‟s 14-person assessment team. Many from Washington think-
tanks, including Andrew Exum from CNAS [Note: see “He Who Shall Not Be Fact Checked”].
152 Stuck in armored vehicles, the [assessment team] could only catch periscope-like
glimpses of Mazar-i-Sharif‟s streets … the team was similarly sheltered in Kabul. … The
Toyotas raced around Kabul. … Afghans who didn‟t jump out of the way could be plowed
down.
152 After one of the SUV‟s ran a bicyclist off the road, Andrew Exum, a fellow at the CNAS
and a former US Army Ranger, asked the driver, “What are you doing, man?” … Exum wrote a
one-pager for McChrystal about aggressive driving entitled “Touring Afghanistan by
Submarine.”
153 McChrystal soon became the chief traffic cop and issued a written directive to all his
troops in the theater “to drive in ways that respect the safety and well-being of the Afghan
people.”
153 The Pentagon received McChrystal‟s classified assessment of the Afghanistan War on
Monday, August 31.
419 Acknowledgements: … My assistants and I found the following [five] blogs helpful as
well: Abu Muqawama, [Andrew Exum‟s blog at CNAS was at the top of the list]…
“THROWING MY SHOE AT BOB WOODWARD”
Finish details in talk of nation, exum rude, 1500 people
************************************
NOTE: the following are excerpts from Andrew Exum’s blog “Abu Muqawama” posted at
CNAS.
Civil-Military Relations in the Obama Era

May 17, 2010 | Posted by Abu Muqawama - 11:50am | 46 Comments
This article by Jonathan Alter in Newsweek on how Obama tamed his generals is great and worth
reading -- although not necessarily for the reasons the author intended. I'm going to offer up my
bottom line conclusion up front and then use the article as a starting point to consider some other
issues.
… As veteran media critics have noted, a growing number of "journalists" have exchanged
ridiculously uncritical coverage of this administration for the kind of high-level access necessary
to write "insider" books on the administration. This article is -- surprise! -- an excerpt from one
of those insider accounts. Nothing in this article seriously challenges the administration's
version of events, … but Alter's "journalism" more closely resembles court stenography than a
public service.
Note: “…‟journalism‟ that more closely resembles court stenography than a public service.” …
sounds like a Bob Woodward book.
...
On Woodward's Book: A (Very Minor) Clarification

September 27, 2010 | Posted by Abu Muqawama - 11:35am | 74 Comments
I arrived back in the office this morning to discover a copy of Bob Woodward's new book on
my desk with the rest of the mail … That having been said, and since Marc Ambinder is
already giving me credit for having convinced Stan McChrystal to institute strict new traffic
guidelines for ISAF vehicles*, I need to make one minor correction -- a clarification, really --
to the section of the book in which I appear:
“The Toyotas raced around Kabul. The drivers honked their horns rather than step on
the brakes, madly changing lanes, swerving through traffic and accelerating at every
opportunity. The theory was that erratic driving reduced the chances of a roadside
attack. Afghans who didn't jump out of the way could be plowed down. After one of
the SUVs ran a bicyclist off the road, Andrew Exum, a fellow at the Center for a New
American Security and a former U.S. Army Ranger, asked the driver, „What are you
doing, man?‟
"You can't be too careful. Could've been a bomb, sir," was the response. But this kind
of commute left Afghans on the street visibly angry. The team could see how an
emphasis on force protection was causing the coalition to lose the Afghan people.
Exum wrote a one-pager for McChrystal about aggressive driving and armored
vehicles entitled "Touring Afghanistan by Submarine."
… It was, as Woodward writes, as if I was seeing Afghanistan through a periscope. … I spent

much of my time on Gen. McChrystal's review team examining our culture -- and how an
operational culture defined by "force protection über alles" hinders our ability to learn about
and understand the local dynamics of the conflict. That, in addition to running people of their
own roads, was what led to that paper.
On another note, readers of this blog will either be pleased or dismayed to discover that the
same black humor and blunt informality you see on this blog are also characteristics of my
interactions with four-star generals. For better or for worse, I suppose.
*********** check comments section for BW book mention?

...
On Woodward's Book: Heroes and Villains?

October 2, 2010 | Posted by Abu Muqawama - 11:29am | 40 Comments
I had a really busy week at work and was only able to finish Bob Woodward's new book this
morning. I must say, I really enjoyed it. It is almost impossible to dispassionately judge the
winners and losers of the book, in large part because your view on who is a hero and who is a
villain will be informed by your opinion regarding the outcome of the policy debate in the
fall of 2009. … For my part, I can see why the White House was not too concerned about this
book. I think the president comes out of it looking really good. …
If I had to fault anyone in the narrative it would be the uniformed military in Washington,
DC. I don't think the uniformed military conspired to box in the president, but I do think
they failed to provide credible alternate strategies until too late in the process. (The only
credible alternative was provided by McChrystal, late in the game, after he was asked what
he would do if he did not get the additional 30,000 troops.) …
Speaking of Stan McChrystal, is he a surprise winner in all of this? Doug Lute is quoted as
believing that McChrystal did not have a conspiratorial bone in his body (I agree) despite
plenty of nonsense from the Left to that effect, and after a U.S. Army inquiry cleared him of
any wrong-doing.
In the L'Affair Rolling Stan, Eliot Cohen asked the following:"I don't get it. The president
fired one of our truly great commanders not for things that he said but for tolerating
indiscretion, disloyalty and disrespect among his subordinates -- but do these people apply
anything remotely like that standard to themselves?" …
...
Comment by Guy Montag on October 3, 2010 - 5:21pm [late post since first blocked]
“… McChrystal did not have a conspiratorial bone in his body (I agree) … and after a U.S.
Army inquiry cleared him of any wrong-doing [in the Army’s handling of the Tillman case]”
McChrystal was hardly cleared of "any wrong-doing" for his role in the Tillman story. The DoD
IG investigation, headed by IG Thomas Gimble, said McChrystal was "accountable" for
"inaccurate award information" (translation: fraudulent Silver Star recommendation & altered
witness statements). However, Gimble left the decision to discipline (or not) up to Secretary of
the Army Pete Geren. Geren appointed Gen. Wallace to "review" the Tillman case and
recommend discipline. Wallace ignored the IG's findings and recommended no discipline for
McChrystal. Instead, Gen. Kensinger became the designated scapegoat for the sins of
McChrystal (among others) for the Army's cover-up of Tillman's friendly-fire death.
...
“Doug Lute is quoted as believing that McChrystal did not have a conspiratorial bone in his
body (I agree) plenty of nonsense from the left to that effect":
I've documented McChrystal's complicity in the bipartisan whitewash (as well as those in
Congress such as Henry Waxman, John McCain, Carl Levin, Jim Webb & President Obama) in
my "The [Untold] Tillman Story" at http://www.feralfirefighter.blogspot.com
...
“Doug Lute is quoted as believing that McChrystal did not have a conspiratorial bone in his
body (I agree) despite plenty of nonsense from the Left to that effect…”
Instead of ad hominum attacks, perhaps AM could actually explain the "nonsense' in my material
or that of Mary Tillman ("Boots on the Ground by Dusk" at blurb.com) or Jon Krakauer's
"Where Men Win Glory" (paperback edition with more detail on McChrystal's role) or try John
T. Reed's "military articles" at johntreed.com. And for those in major metro areas, the Sundance
documentary "The Tillman Story" is now showing (two theatres in DC).
And, I wouldn't call myself "Left". I would identify more with the agrarianism of Wendell Berry
or the principled conservatives/libertarians like Bill Kauffman, Andrew Bacevich or some of the
voices at the "American Conservative" magazine. Maybe I'm so far to the "Left" that I'm
"Right"?
Concerning the Tillman story, AM is either willfully ignorant or disingenuous, at best. Last year,
it certainly appeared that he was whitewashing McChrystal with his critical review of Krakauer's
book last year for the WP and his spirited defense of McChrystal in his 11-02-09 AM post.
...
Comment by Pave Low John on October 3, 2010 - 5:00pm
"Jay-zus, Exum, get off your knees, you're embarrassing the CINC" - possible quote from
anyone in 10th Mountain or the 75th RR who remembers Andrew E. when he had a commission
and some self-respect.
Believe it or not, I actually read 'This Man's Army'. Read Fick's book too. What it is about these
prep-school/Ivy League guys doing a hitch or two in the combat arms, then punching out to work
for some lefty think-tank? Afraid you'll miss the GS-15 gravy-train? But don't worry, Exum, I'm
sure the SECDEF or Michele or some other DoD wonk reads this blog and is very happy with
your analysis. I'm positive they'll make you a minor assistant undersecretary for something-or-
other in the Five-Sided Squirrel Cage one day. …
Even McChrystal, god help us, pussed out in the end. Does anyone here REALLY think a crafty
old operator like Stan the Man had no idea how stupid it was to let a Rolling Stone reporter
watch his staff get hammered in Paris? He wanted out of the hot seat, plain and simple, and he
used that douchebag reporter to do it. Now he can shrug and claim he's not a 'quitter' if the whole
thing falls apart in the next couple of years.
God, I can't wait to retire. Just one more year of this...
******
Insert edited NPR interview after finish it up 12-13-11
******
Woodward, Barno and Some Other Guy on Afghanistan

December 6, 2010 | Posted by Abu Muqawama - 1:42am | 10 Comments
A few months ago, LTG (Ret.) Dave Barno and I sat down to try and figure out how the U.S.
military and its NATO allies might transition from a counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan
to something less resource-intensive between July 2011, when the president envisions U.S.
troops beginning a withdrawal, and 2014, when Hamid Karzai wants the government of
Afghanistan to have full sovereignty over its territory.
The result of our thinking is a new report that will be released this week [update: read it here]
and formally rolled out next week in an event at the Newseum moderated by Bob Woodward. …
we already have 300+ RSVPs.)
I am actually in Afghanistan myself at the moment, traveling around the country speaking with
U.S. and allied military officers, Afghan politicians and military officers, locally based
journalists, civilian researchers, NGO representatives, and many others. … I am scheduled to
arrive back in the United States about eight hours before the event, so my beard will be long, my
hair unkempt, and my observations fresh. Please join us.
...
Responsible Transition: Watch LIVE

If you are not one of the 500+ people coming to this afternoon's event featuring Bob
Woodward, Dave Barno and yours truly, you can watch it live on C-SPAN at 1:30 p.m. or by
following this link to the C-SPAN website. Read the report here (.pdf). You will want to
watch this event live, because I have just gotten off a plane from Kabul via Dubai, am
severely jet-lagged, and just may say some ridiculously crazy stuff. The support staff here at
CNAS is trying to determine exactly how much coffee I can ingest between now and 1:30
p.m., so count on me to either fall of the dais or be particularly intemperate/amusing in my
remarks. (Oh, and I have not trimmed my beard in a month. Nate said I could not henna the
thing, but I think it would have been awesome if I had.)
****** 1500 folks?
...
Afghanistan Trip Report, Part III: Five Concrete Ways Policy

Makers in DC Can Help the War Effort
Sometimes I wish I were just in the "Pointing Out All the Things Going Wrong in
Afghanistan" business. Part of my job responsibilities, though, include being in the solutions
business. Accordingly, and to mark the release of the much hyped December review, I posted
commentary on Foreign Policy last night outlining five concrete ways in which policy
makers, legislators and intelligence officials in Washington, DC can help the war effort in
Afghanistan.
… Finally, if you really can't get enough of my commentary on Afghanistan, here I am on

the Diane Rehm Show yesterday. I got a little testy when one guest made some statements
about the insurgency without backing them up with hard evidence. But looking back, I really
should have apologized for being somewhat rude.
******** see transcript

...
Comment by Visitor on December 18, 2010 - 3:18pm [last post since first ones blocked]
“… here I am on the Diane Rehm Show yesterday [12-15-10]. I got a little testy when one guest
made some statements about the insurgency without backing them up with hard evidence. …”
...
@AM, I missed hearing your appearance on the Diane Rhem NPR show Wednesday. However, I
did speak briefly with Bob Woodward on Monday‟s NPR Talk of the Nation.
First, I asked Woodward about the backstory to Gen. Stanley McChrystal‟s firing, referring to
the two meetings held May 6 and 11th (pp. 352, 354 of “Obama‟s Wars”) during which
McChrystal received a “strike one” and “strike two.” Unfortunately, Woodward provided no
juicy details about what was discussed during these meetings just a month before McChrystal
was fired.
Second, I asked Woodward to comment on how Gen. McChrystal‟s key role in the Army‟s
cover-up of Pat Tillman‟s friendly-fire death has been whitewashed by the Washington
establishment. Bob Woodward responded,"...of course, McChrystal was in the chain of
command, … But he was not the hands-on person making that decision."
“Not the “hands on“ person! Really? Unfortunately, I called up on the fly and hadn‟t prepared
my questions. Here‟s the question I should have asked Bob Woodward when I had the chance:
...
In your book, “Obama‟s Wars” (p.154), you wrote that Gen. McChrystal had merely "... signed
off on the Silver Star recommendation that suggested Tillman had been killed by the enemy ..."
However, Jon Krakauer in his book, "Where Men Win Glory" (pp. 334 – 347 paperback edition),
described how Gen. McChrystal personally "administered the medal recommendation process"
with a false narrative that "was painstakingly written to create the impression Pat Tillman was
killed by enemy fire" and directly supervised the Ranger RGT commanders who altered the two
Silver Star witness statements. The Silver Star recommendation was "fraudulent" by "any
objective measure."
But instead of merely having "signed off" on a piece of paper that landed on his desk, Gen.
McChrystal had "orchestrate[d] what can only be described as a broad conspiracy to conceal
Tillman's fratricide ..." [Note: Krakauer's account was based largely on sworn testimony by Gen.
McChrystal, COL Nixon, LTC Kauzlarich, and LTC Bailey obtained by FOIA].
And Mary Tillman, in response to President Obama‟s May 2009 nomination of Gen. McChrystal
as Afghan war commander, wrote in her book, “Boots on the Ground by Dusk”: “Not only is he
[McChrystal] lying about the circumstances surrounding Pat‟s death, … he is proposing false
language for the Silver Star narrative.”
Mr. Woodard, were you ignorant of the facts of McChrystal's role in the Tillman case, did your
your high-level sources deceive you, or were you doing your part to whitewash Gen.
McChrystal‟s central role in the cover-up of Pat Tillman friendly-fire death?
...
@AM, my final question for Woodward applies equally to you.
On your blog, you‟ve contributed to the whitewash of McChrystal, “made some statements …
without backing them up with hard evidence,” and written a biased WP review of Krakauer's
book [see “He Who Shall Not Be Fact-Checked” in the post “The [Untold] Tillman Story” at
http://www.feralfirefighter.blogspot.com].
P.S. You forgot to mention in your previous post about “Obama‟s Wars” that Bob Woodward
put your blog at the top of his list of “helpful” blogs (p. 419). Your modesty is commendable.
**************
Add Obama’s Wars after finish it up; then edit it for inclusion here
*************

&quot;Throwing My Shoe at Bob Woodward ... Not&quot; (DRAFT January 2011)

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

&quot;Throwing My Shoe at Bob Woodward ... Not&quot; (DRAFT January 2011)

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

BOB WOODWARD’S WHITEWASH OF GEN.

MCCHRYSTAL’S ROLE IN THE TILLMAN COVER-UP

Woodward’s Portrayal of McChrystal’s Role in the Tillman Cover-Up:

For a more detailed argument, See Appendix J1 -- “Gen. McChrystal‟s Contradictory

“Somehow torture is tolerated. … Somehow lying is tolerated. … Somehow faking

Bob Woodward’s Whitewash of McChrystal’s Role in the Tillman Cover-Up:

NEAL CONAN, host:

Part I: L’Affair Rolling Stan

Guy Montag’s Response to Woodward’s First Answer:

Guy Montag’s Response to Woodward’s Remarks:

Part II: Woodward’s Whitewash of Gen. McChrystal’s Role In the

Guy Montag’s Response to Woodward’s Remarks about McChrystal’s Role:

And, in response to President Obama‟s May 2009 nomination of Gen. McChrystal as

Whitewash, could have shook the tree a bit

******* not ready throwing my shoe … not missing.

Woodward’s Portrayal of McChrystal’s Role in the Tillman Cover-Up:

190 “Counterterrorist decapitation doesn‟t work unless it is enabled by effective

38 He [Obama] was unsentimental and ruthless.

Finish details in talk of nation, exum rude, 1500 people

Civil-Military Relations in the Obama Era

On Woodward's Book: A (Very Minor) Clarification

… It was, as Woodward writes, as if I was seeing Afghanistan through a periscope. … I spent

*********** check comments section for BW book mention?

On Woodward's Book: Heroes and Villains?

Comment by Pave Low John on October 3, 2010 - 5:00pm

God, I can't wait to retire. Just one more year of this...

Woodward, Barno and Some Other Guy on Afghanistan

Responsible Transition: Watch LIVE

Afghanistan Trip Report, Part III: Five Concrete Ways Policy

December 16, 2010 | Posted by Abu Muqawama - 5:58am | 13 Comments

… Finally, if you really can't get enough of my commentary on Afghanistan, here I am on

******** see transcript

@AM, my final question for Woodward applies equally to you.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen

"Throwing My Shoe at Bob Woodward ... Not" (DRAFT January 2011)

"Throwing My Shoe at Bob Woodward ... Not" (DRAFT January 2011)