Yale Dems Drop Support for Tillman Film to Protect Prof. McChrystal

Gen. Stanley McChrystal | US Army photo.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the former commander of US troops in Afghanistan, resigned in disgrace in June in the wake of intemperate—and, some say, insubordinate—comments that he and his staff made to a reporter for Rolling Stone magazine. (The RS article is here.)

Like most famous people who get fired, McChrystal landed on his feet—as a lecturer at Yale. But even though the school year has barely started in New Haven, McChrystal’s already triggering controversy there, too. This time, the uproar’s not about the Rolling Stone piece. It’s about one of McChrystal’s first tours in Afghanistan, when he was in charge of the Special Operations task force that included NFL star-turned Army Ranger Pat Tillman.  

Amir Bar-Lev, the director of The Tillman Story, a documentary about the late NFL star-turned Army Ranger, is hosting a screening of the film on Yale’s campus on September 11. (Elizabeth Gettelman recently reviewed the film for Mother Jones.) The Yale Democrats, who were originally supposed to sponsor the screening, have backed out of the event after learning that it aims to be a “teachable moment” focusing on McChrystal’s presence at Yale. Here’s the Yale Daily NewsEsther Zuckerman:

[Dems President Ben Stango] said his organization supports the film and its message, but that the Dems, who he said consulted Yale faculty and other advisors about the decision, did not want to us the event as a means to protest McChrystal.

“The Yale College Democrats do not attack war heroes,” Stango said. “We do not attack members of the Yale faculty.”

This is really weak tea. I’m not aware that anyone questions the basic facts of McChrystal’s involvement in the Tillman matter. Here’s what happened: even though McChrystal knew that Tillman had been killed by friendly fire, he nonetheless recommended him for a Silver Star for valor “in the line of devastating enemy fire.” Later, McChrystal was nearly demoted for misleading investigators. (Jon Krakauer wrote perhaps the best summary of the McChrystal-Tillman incident.)

The Tillman documentary doesn’t even get into McChrystal’s time in Iraq, when he supervised and at times personally accompanied Task Force 6-26, which operated the notorious “Camp Nama” (short for Nasty-Ass Military Facility). The Red Cross did not have access to the facility or its “black room” interrogation cell. Reports by human rights groups and journalists suggest that at least two men were tortured to death at Camp Nama. (Andrew Sullivan has a good wrap-up here.)

This isn’t to say that Yale should or shouldn’t employ McChrystal. But there’s no reason that talking about his past should be off limits. The Yale Dems would do well to remember that McChrystal had to resign because of the comments that he and his subordinates made about the President—a Democratic president, no less. Backing out of sponsoring the Tillman movie sends the wrong message about the acceptability of debate about McChrystal’s history. If Stango feels McChrystal needs his protection, he should go to the movie and explain why—and turn what he fears would be a one-sided attack event into an interesting and informative debate.

Look: McChrystal is a tough guy. He’s been criticized before. Essentially, he’s been personally fired by the President of the United States. I have no doubt that he would vigourously defend his actions with regards to Camp Nama and Tillman. He’s a grown man, a general, and a widely acknowledged badass. He doesn’t need the Yale Democrats to protect his feelings.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate