UPDATE: H/T to Michelle Malkin for this update.
Father Paul McNellis details options for Scott Beauchamp at The Democracy Project.
Black Five concurs with the Father McNellis.
Confederate Yankee reports that the U.S. Army is still trying to find that elusive “disfigured woman” of whom Beauchamp wrote.
Where? Oh, where could she be? Have they looked inside Beauchamp’s head?
Do you think TNR staff will come back from the important vacation in time to help find her? Don’t hold your breath.
UPDATE: Power Line weighs in on Scottie’s literary license.
UPDATE: Well, it’s official, folks. We right-wingers have overreacted. HuffiPo has found Beauchamp’s mystery woman to be “only one minor error” in his story. Thank goodness for Max Blumenthal and the folks at HuffiPo to show us the errors in our critique of Scottie’s journalistic ethics and letting us know that we shouldn’t be concerned with such a “minor” oversight on his part, at least the one that TNR has admitted, so far.
This reminds me of a post I had on 7/23/07 about Penelope Trunk, another HuffiPo contributor, educating us on how “it’s always in the context of the journalist’s story, not the speaker’s story.” In other words, it’s not always the truth, as long as it is the writer’s truth.
Now do you get it? Apparently we are just being too critical of Scottie. His truth doesn’t have to be the way it actually happened, as long as it is his “story”.
UPDATE: Myra Langerhas, a reader/commenter at Michelle Malkin’s site, has a good interpretation of TNR’s supposed “fact-checking” abilities.
TNR also established that some troops did, in fact, run over and kill a dog with a Bradley. How, you ask? Well after consultation with Bradley manufacturers and with numerous veterinarians, they have determined that if you run over a dog with a Bradley, it will die.
They also confirmed the existence of a mass children’s grave after finding 2 yo-yo’s, a popped balloon and a Kurdish edition of Dr. Seuss.
These guys are the pros, people, don’t question them.
(H/T to Michelle Malkin)
Well, at least they realize part of it. TNR does admit that at least one fact slipped past their fact-checkers (emphasis mine).
Beauchamp’s essay consisted of three discrete anecdotes. In the first, Beauchamp recounted how he and a fellow soldier mocked a disfigured woman seated near them in a dining hall. Three soldiers with whom TNR has spoken have said they repeatedly saw the same facially disfigured woman. One was the soldier specifically mentioned in the Diarist. He told us: “We were really poking fun at her; it was just me and Scott, the day that I made that comment. We were pretty loud. She was sitting at the table behind me. We were at the end of the table. I believe that there were a few people a few feet to the right.”
The recollections of these three soldiers differ from Beauchamp’s on one significant detail (the only fact in the piece that we have determined to be inaccurate): They say the conversation occurred at Camp Buehring, in Kuwait, prior to the unit’s arrival in Iraq. When presented with this important discrepancy, Beauchamp acknowledged his error. We sincerely regret this mistake.
Ooops! I hate that the folks at TNR missed that
minor substantial point in the grand scheme of Scottie’s…..errr…..reporting.
Camp Buehring is just slightly removed from where Beauchamp was to have allegedly seen and mocked a “disfigured woman”, like a whole other country removed. That darned geography. It must not have been Scottie’s forte in school.
Even in TNR’s latest statement, they say that Beauchamp’s writing “was about the morally and emotionally distorting effects of war.” Well, there goes that idea, TNR!
Let’s break this down even farther. Shall we? TNR also comes clean and tells us that “the conversation occurred at Camp Buehring, in Kuwait, prior to the unit’s arrival in Iraq.”
Hello!? Beauchamp had not even gotten to FOB Falcon. He was still in a staging area, waiting to go into Iraq. So, his vile and reprehensible behavior towards an unknown “disfigured woman” he claims to have seen “nearly every time I went to dinner in the chow hall at my base in Iraq”, if not a fictional character, was in another country, well before he was “morally” and “emotionally” distorted by the “effects of war”, a war which is not being fought in Kuwait. You understand the significance of this little fallacy in his writing for TNR, right?
Yo, Scottie! When you ask yourself that question about being a “monster”, you may want to answer in the affirmative but not because of the “morally and emotionally distorting effects of war”, just too much time on your nut-root hands at Camp Buehring.
One of Michelle’s Active-duty Army readers shares his thoughts on why the “disfigured woman” is now, suddenly in Camp Buehring, instead of the Forward Operating Base, since no one else could “corroborate” her being there.
There is a good reason why Beauchamp chose Camp Buehring as the place to relocate his “disfigured woman” tale: it is a way station for units deploying into Iraq, and, besides a small cadre, very few people spend more than 2-3 weeks there, making it difficult for anyone to contradict him and the buddy who backs him up. It is silly, of course, since it means his cruelty towards his fellow man began before he heard his first shot, but most civilians would not know the transient nature of Buehring and it makes the water cloudier for those who wish to defend him.
TNR considers this
“error” outright fabrication a slight “mistake”? So much for TNR’s “rigorous editing and fact-checking.” It makes one wonder what they think it would take to constitute a real screw-up on their part.
Another country? Before deployment to the theater of war? Mistake? Error?
Do you think Scottie is sitting there scratching his head wondering why “fellow soldiers no longer feel comfortable communicating with reporters”? I don’t think it would take a genius to figure that one out, Scottie.
I’m with Ace of Spades. What would this alleged disfigured woman be doing in a Forward Operating Base?
Bryan Preston asks a good question too – “Where is that stratified mass grave?”
Like Matt Sanchez points out, “I’d like to see the list of military experts TNR consulted prior to publishing the story”, since Matt “spoke with the Army PAO, they confirmed that prior to the publication in The New Republic, the PAO had never spoken to anyone from that publications editorial staff.”
There’s that “rigorous editing and fact-checking” that makes the folks at TNR “place great weight on the corroborations” they have received.
I can’t imagine why the Army would cut the liberal press’ investigation short. TNR did such an awesome job from the start on this one.
Yeah, boy! Uh-huh!
And, just as an aside………… Hello, Phoenix Woman? In this blog post are some more of my “thoughts on Scott Thomas Beauchamp“. I didn’t want you to run into the problem of having to be “poking about the VOJ” to find the links to them, like you did last time, and feel the need to confuse me with a purveyor of hate-speech, again, because you could not locate them. Enjoy the read!
Others posting on this issue: Stephen Spruiell, John Noonan, Junkyard Blog, Michael Goldfarb, Dean Barnett, Baldilocks, Political Animal, Bill’s Bites, Wake up America, Solomonia, Bookworm Room, Steven Spruiell, Mark Steyn