Unfortunately, I cannot respond to the various emails and phone calls I've received. It has been very disconcerting to receive death threats and so much hatred. I hope this email clarifies my views better. Please take this as an honest attempt from someone trying to right a wrong misunderstanding.
Clearing up the misconceptions in the Pat Tillman Article
I wrote an article entitled "Patrick Tillman is not a hero", in which I tried to contradict the American society viewpoint that Pat Tillman was a hero for his service in Afghanistan. I disagree with the conflicts that he took place in, but that's not why I did not think he was a hero. I thought (and still think) that there is an unhealthy tendency in the American public to knee-jerk into
hero worship, but instead of persuading people to look at this issue, I just inflamed the hero worship and the situation. Re-reading my words, I did come to the conclusion that my words were inflammatory and tainted the meaning of my article. I do admit I was partly sarcastic on an issue that seems to be dear to
a lot of people. I did not write my words with sufficient "political
correctness" to make them palatable. For the insensitivity, I apologize.
I mean no disrespect to the family of Patrick Tillman, and I would be very distraught to learn they were hurt by my comments. That was not my intent. My intent was to open up a debate on whether or not serving in the U.S. military is a de facto reason for considering someone a hero. I've been quite bothered by
the continued calling of U.S. soldiers as "heroes", especially in conflicts that I find nothing to be proud of.
Regardless of that, I stated clearly that if Pat Tillman had been defending the East coast of the United States from invasion, I would have thought his service to be heroic and laudable. I think the same of soldiers who fought in conflicts like World War II. However, I'm not proud of dishonorable American
interventions throughout history (Vietnam, Bay of Pigs, Puerto Rico, Nicaragua, Haiti, Grenada, Panama, The Philippines, Iraq 2004), and I adamantly refuse to consider soldiers in those wars, heroes. Every American intervention and every American soldier's action is not automatically heroic, and that was my point.
Each case must be examined critically, and I don't feel the American public is undertaking any critical examination of the legitimacy of the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, nor the legitimacy of the actions of the troops there.
I did learn one lesson, though: there is freedom of speech in this country, but not much toleration for its expression. Freedom of speech exists only for those that parrot the "party line". For those that even peep a dissent, only scorn is awaiting them.
I hope this letter clears up the misconceptions that have arisen. My criticism was not for Patrick Tillman (who may have been the most honorable man alive) or his family, or even soldiers serving the United States today. It is to the society back home, which seems to be unable to distinguish between honorable
American interventions and honorable American soldiers, and soldiers who served in dishonorable interventions and, therefore, dishonored themselves. And, for the reasons outlined above, I cannot support troops that have dishonored themselves by serving in a dishonorable war, and much less consider them heroes.
Rene L. Gonzalez Berrios, M.A.
Political Science / University of Massachusetts
renegonzalez7@hotmail.com
Nice "apology" fucktard not only insulting the troops but also the American public.....apology NOT accepted.
