Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

TNR claims partial vindication [UPDATED]

Here. Then they head off on vacation. A preemptive “can’t be reached for comment,” if you will.

In the comments to this morning’s post, SEK and timmy are (predicably) satisfied with TNR’s post hoc “fact checking.” In fact, in timmy’s case, that satisfaction extends to trying out a series of end zone dances meant to taunt the NEOCON skeptics.

You know, those of us who will believe anything.

Like, say, corroboration from unnamed sources about things that, in some cases, never even were under dispute.

Ace, on the other hand? He’s not buying it.

For my part, I’ll just repost here my response from the comments, below:

So now we’re doing “accurate,” just in a completely different context, before Beauchamp ever saw any combat, according to a couple of unnamed corrobators; and “potentially,” according to the people who make equipment they probably don’t want to say can’t do certain things — even though that equipment would have to be used in ways that people who routinely drive them aren’t likely to use them, give the space between vehicles and the tightness of routes.

As others have noted — and as I noted before — Beauchamp wrote about things happening in war that didn’t happen in war. He wrote about how war dehumanizes, when in fact the dehumanization was grafted onto war by a person so expecting to see it that he evidently acted it out in advance of seeing combat.

And this is being held up as vindication? Of what, exactly? That bad people can behave badly — but that, should you transfer that behavior to combat zones, it has more poignance, can have larger significances, and is the kind of thing one can easily sell to those who share your same selection biases?

Meanwhile, if Dave Sirota is lurking around here, allow me to point him to Timmy. Who, I think, is the “proof” he’s looking for when it comes to finding these supposedly mythical creatures who, when they are able to seize on things that could make the military look bad, act as if they’ve just scored a touchdown or stuffed a basketball.

Time to stop pretending you care about anything other than your own political positions, timmy.

And yes, I’ll echo others who aren’t particular sold yet on any of these “corroborations” — particularly as they are anonymous, and TNR has beat a hasty retreat having posted the update.

Now, as for the charges of fabulism: as Scott knows, the context in which these things supposedly (and were reported to have) taken place are an essential part of the narrative thrust of Beauchamp’s pieces. It was, in fact, the ONLY thing that gave them “significance,” or made them “resonate.” A story about some liberal asshole who’d joined the military so he could write poignant pieces about his own dehunamization (which he was evidently determined to insure, to the point where it’s fair to say he may even have been straining to get there, acting out in ways he already believe soldiers acted out, leaving him a private 2-years in) and sell them to anti-war mags under the cloak of absolute moral authority, is another piece entirely, and, I think, one that speaks to a completely different “significance” than the one Beauchamp was trying to sell us on here.

Maybe that’s the article that needs writing — kind of an antidote to those who have so internalized Full Metal Jacket that it has become not a story, but an anti-war credo.

Beauchamp plucked facts that have yet to be completely corrobarated out of a number of contexts that didn’t speak to his thesis and shoehorned them into his thesis to create the illusion of significance. What is that if not fabulism?

****
update: Did Foer misremember? (h/t baldilocks)

Also, Shakespeare’s Sister notes that Beauchamp’s Kuwait / Iraq gaffe was not the trifle some of his defenders are making it out to be.

She’s out on a limb here, and I have the gut feeling she’s looking for a plausible excuse to be talked out of that conclusion (so eager is she to distance herself from the wingnuts, who she seems sure can’t reach the same conclusion with the proper nuance), but for the time being, kudos (h/t Allah).

Be sure to check out the comments, where we get the standard Full Metal Jacket run-down on how soldiers are systematically taught to dehumanize the enemy, and in the process turned into killbots.

A soldier shows up to set the record straight, as much as possible, but if you listen closely, you can almost hear his coarseness…

86 Replies to “TNR claims partial vindication [UPDATED]”

  1. happyfeet says:

    If teh yarmulke fits, you must acquit!!!

  2. SEK says:

    I don’t think “satisfied” accurately describes what I wrote, which means I don’t think the “predictably” applies, but really, I’m just upset I didn’t get a link.

  3. Jeff G. says:

    I think it was predictable in light of your earlier posts, Scott. I can’t judge your satisfaction, I suppose, but, satisfied or not in this instance, I still think it speaks to a larger satisfaction you feel in general — and is therefore perfectly reasonable.

    It’s poignant, in fact ;-)

    Re: a link. I wasn’t aware you posted on this — I was reacting to the comments. I wrote this post while I was reading posts and writing responses to comments in the other thread simultaneously.

    If you wrote a post on the matter, feel free to link it here.

  4. Topsecretk9 says:

    TNR says they are at this point hindered to produce anymore facts – but an issue written about and then subsequently questions were raised, was the tire changing a tire in waist deep of shit by the Weekly Standard – most notably the Hummers weren’t fitted with a spare (until very recently, apparently) and constructed to ride on a puncture in order to retreat yada yada. IOW no one but an idiot would swim in crap to change a tire only to realize there is no tire to change it with and really not necessary.

    I dunno, but this seems to be an issue they could have attempted to answer even without the full cooperation and at least in their email correspondence.

  5. Alice H says:

    Anyone know what the Vegas odds are on the vacation never ending?

  6. N. O'Brain says:

    Beauchamp was writing fiction.

    Fine. Some of the greatest literature is the war story.

    TNR published it as fact.

    Not good.

    A lie.

    A lie that denigrates America’s warriors and gives a boost to our enemy’s propaganda.

    Got it now, timmah?

    Or is that too hard for you to follow?

  7. Rob Crawford says:

    What I want to know is, if we’re supposed to now accept STB’s tales, can I cite David Drake’s Hammer’s Slammers as accurate descriptions of the Vietnam war? He served there, and has said the stories were inspired by his experiences.

  8. B Moe says:

    I heard TNR is negotiating with Joe Wilson to go over there and investigate for them. Just a rumor.

  9. Topsecretk9 says:

    B-Moe

    HEH.

  10. SEK says:

    Jeff: I this, but this one’s more apropos, since it deals with the evidence. Based on that, yes, I suppose my response was predictable.

  11. […] any case, I have to run, but see this post at Ace of Spades and this one from PW for more about why this doesn’t change a great deal of the problems many bloggers had with […]

  12. Rick Smith says:

    This POS(STB) joined the Army with an agenda. That sounds intriguing until you read what he has to say and manner in which his story is unreaveling. Turns out he is more POS than TNR would have us believe and probably more than they anticipated if they ever stopped to reflect, which I don’t think they did. Preconcieved self-importance has a way of causing a self-fulfilling result. I reject all this asshole has written as nothing but classic stream consciousness from a self- important loser with connections. That this became newsworthy is the fault of his enablers, the editors at TNR and his wife. They had an agenda that totally obscured rational thought. Given their history TNR should just own up to their lack of critical judgement and fold up camp.

  13. Matt Collins says:

    there is an amazing phenom in american pop culture… I think it is exemplified by the throngs of folks who line up to get in front of Simon Cowell and make asses of themselves. The spooky part is they not only have no clue that they suck… they are convinced they in fact don’t suck at all. And to the contrary, they are absolutely sure that “if you believe in your dream, blah, blah, blah”. And so despite being recorded for “posterity” and having access to the playback, the suck-mongers persist in their fantasy. They are, no matter the consensus to the contrary, the next Mariah, or the next Sinatra. And this is just a sick reflection of what seems to be going on throughout our society. Someone out there actually believes, for instance, that Chuck Schumer, Ted Kennedy, and the retarded-looking guy whose name I won’t try to spell, are actually razor-sharp… when in fact not a one is likely to top an IQ of 80 or so. But you wouldn’t know it to watch them prosthelatize… They are damned sure that they are really fucking smart. A strange thing occurs to me… it is not novel in any sense, but it is certainly frightening: folks like timmy “trim” tim are seriously convinced that if they say it often enough, no matter the facts… if they just repeat it often enough the lie becomes the truth. The problem is that the truth is what it is… it is immutable. Even if you bury it in a shallow grave under a trash heap of tripe… it is still the truth. And no matter how often your mother tells you your pretty, if you’re not… you’re not. If your boyfriend tells you you have a great voice when you really sound like a sea hag, no matter what you do… no matter how much you “believe in yourself”… no matter how hard you try… you will still sound like a monotoned mute on playback. It’s just fucking wrong. At least with the gong show, there was never any question who ought to get the gong. It was self evident. But we have shifted from a culture that can collectively discern what is bullshit and agree it is bullshit… and that’s because half of us really do believe that the truth is just as it is perceived. That is that perception is reality. And that is just fucked up and sad. Timmy’s ignorance is, as my pop would say, invincible. And there’s not a damn thing the likes of Simon Cowell could say to convince him he sings like a sea hag.

  14. SGT Ted says:

    The proper enlisted military terminology is:

    STB is more full of shit than a Christmas Goose.

    That he would write about changing run-flats in indian country shows that he is unclear on the concept, much less the reality of no spare tires carried on patrol missions.

    His writing about the war degrading his humanity…well thats a choice each of us must make as we experience some pretty ugly shit. That he allowed himself to go there speaks more of him than of others.

  15. Bender Bending Rodriguez says:

    “Here is the DIRECT QUOTE:

    …saw her nearly every time I went to dinner in the chow hall at my base in Iraq.”

    Saw here EVERY DAY in Iraq, eh? Even though EVERY DAY, she was in Kuwait. That’s some good eyesight.

    Wow, so a lefty with an anti-war agenda joins the military and then lies in public about what is seared — SEARED! — in his memory.

    That’d be new.

  16. Mike H. says:

    Can someone explain to me, why the hell an individual who was mistreating a piece of equipment by driving over stalls, concrete barriers and curbs, wasn’t Court Martialed? In an urban environment with roads that were conceivably clean of ieds and he was all over the obstacles near to the road it would seem that he would get hung up and it would be brought to the attention of his commanding officer. Not his OIC but his CO. As a Staff Sergeant I would have had his ass in a heart beat. This STB is so full of merde it’s unbelievable. I knew a lot of guys like him and they were only good for policing the area. NB policing = cleanup.

  17. Rob Crawford says:

    In an urban environment with roads that were conceivably clean of ieds and he was all over the obstacles near to the road it would seem that he would get hung up and it would be brought to the attention of his commanding officer.

    Wouldn’t that kind of behavior put a lot of extra (unnecessary) wear on the tracks? Wouldn’t that make it more likely the Bradley would throw a track? Wouldn’t that put the entire unit at risk if it happened in the field?

    Again, if someone really were behaving as he described, he should have reported it up the chain, not in TNR.

  18. baldilocks says:

    Jeff,

    Just so you know, I think Ace caught Mr. Foer in, shall we say, a “misstatement.”

  19. Swen Swenson says:

    Do you really think Sirota might be lurking here? I suspect he’s at home nursing a very sore bhut and vowing NeVeR to mess with That Guy again. But I hope I’m wrong..

  20. Rick Ballard says:

    Mike H.,

    Isn’t there generally an NCO riding around in the Bradley? I’m sure there must be occasions when there is not but the purpose of the vehicle is to haul a squad hither and yon and usually a squad has a squad leader watching the store. Just wondering.

  21. klrfz1 says:

    If you wanted to corroborate anything in that TNR editorial, who would you call? SEK, timmyb, heet, who exactly would you call? Ghostbusters?

    Obama and me were sittin in teh mess hall, poking fun at a lady little gurl with her arms & laigs blowed off and then we invaded Pakistan. We was all laffing so hard. Good times.

  22. A. Pendragon says:

    Guys, you’re just not taking into account the coarsening effect working at TNR has on one’s character.

    The bull-pen. I can’t believe I’m in the bull-pen. The horror. The horror.

  23. marcus says:

    Way, WAY OT, but the comments box is missing it’s toolbar when I view it (in both Firefox and IE) and I was wondering if anyone else was experiencing this, or had a remedy. Thanks in advance.

  24. klrfz1 says:

    Hey. I’m a published writer now, aren’t I?

    tw: comparison this

  25. OHNOES says:

    Amazing how timb and others continue to forget the glock shells overreach as well.

    Nothing has changed. Beauchamp is still a fabulist and a liar who twisted facts to fit his thesis, heet’s sputtering incoherence aside.

  26. JD says:

    Who could forget the square shells ?

  27. dicentra says:

    Well, there are several ways for this to turn out: we could keep repeating our chorus of WHAT A DOUCHEBAG (Wannabe Hemmingway Artlessly Trashes Army, Driving Opinionators Utterly Crazy, Hoping Evidence Belies All Garbage).

    Or when it turns out that he totally lied, it will be EGREGIOUS (Emohawk Gains Renown, Emoting Garbage In Outrageously Untrue Slander).

    Or, if his stories check out, it would be a TRAIN WRECK (TNR’s Right, And Incensed Neocons & Wingers Reluctantly Eat Crow Kabobs).

    TW: LARITY MONIOUS. No, I like mine better.

  28. N. O'Brain says:

    “Who could forget the square shells ?”

    Well, I sure that timmah could square a circle.

    ‘Cause pi are square.

  29. psychologizer says:

    Be sure to check out the comments,

    Seriously. This is fantastic:

    It takes a lot of work to deprogram my friends to stop referring to locals as ‘hadjis’ and ‘rag-heads’ when speaking after returning from time on duty.

    I’ve never believed anything so much in my life.

    TW: Amende Buidhe

    Friend of mine. French-Scottish lass. It took a lot of work to deprogram my friends to stop referring to her as “cheesepipes” when they got back from the Hundred Years’ War. But I did that work.

    And, yes, I hit it.

  30. Pablo says:

    Yes, I too work hard to deprogram my friends. Because I care.

    And I gots mad deprogramming skillz.

  31. Jeff G. says:

    Seriously, psychologizer. It’s like a game of fictive king of the hill over there, ain’t it?

    “We love the troops — the robotic racist killbots.”

  32. dicentra says:

    ‘Cause pi are square.

    Don’t be ridiculous. Pie are round. Cornbread are square.

  33. JD says:

    That whole we support the troops but not the war meme is pretty much tossed right out the window over there. Apparently, after quenching their blood-lust, they run around making racist comments, raping, looting, pillaging, and just being all around bad people. But dammit, we love us some troops. Fuckers.

  34. Major John says:

    Man, I sure missed all the fun – looting, pillaging, etc. Maybe next time around I can take care of that glaring ommission.

    TW: concilium cloth. Meh. I prefer cotton m’self.

  35. daleyrocks says:

    Yep, for the left, Scott Thomas Beauchamp exists. He is a soldier stationed in Iraq. Therefore he speaks truth to power. QED

    Funny, Harry Reid said he wasn’t going to believe shit General Petraeus said if it included the word progress? There must be some kind of disconnect on believing soldiers here somewhere.

    Jimmy Massey was also an American soldier who was “dehumanized” by war and came back and gave tours talking about his “real life” experiences in this war. It didn’t work out so well after it turned out that Jimmy’s “real life” stories turned out to be total bullshit after a little fact checking.

    Memeories. It all reminds me of the Christmas I spent in Cambodiea with John Kerry. The year was…..

  36. Topsecretk9 says:

    Matt Sanchez – a person who possibly had gay sex so take what he says with a grain of salt so say the left – has a pretty neat new report on FOB Falcon…

    The REAL Fob Falcon

    …I spoke to several drivers on patrol that evening, none of whom thought the details of the “Baghdad Diarist” were even remotely true. At the risk of offending some pet lovers, it’s not beyond a deployed member of the armed forces to kill a dog. Especially, in a culture that does not keep canines as pets and rarely names anything that walks on four-legs. I saw a Marine shoot several strays with sniper accuracy in the Anbar province, after a bitting incident had sent one of his buddies back to Baghdad for a series of long painful rabies injections in the abdomen.

    The sounds of shots, massive shells sent to an unseen and distant target, is common on FOB Falcon, but the shock of the media coverage around the “Baghdad Diarist” took the public affairs office by storm. Pending the investigation no one was allowed to comment, not even on the simple questions like Private Beauchamp’s whereabouts, but it is notable that a soldier who enlisted two years before and has some college credit would still hold the rank of private…

  37. mojo says:

    …Pie are round. Cornbread are square.

    Not if y’all are makin’ it right – cast iron skillets being, yes, round

    Damn Yankees!

    SB: peace, Penny
    Danger, Will Robinson!

  38. Pablo says:

    Fun with Foer! From the vindication piece:

    Most important, we spoke with five other members of Beauchamp’s company, and all corroborated Beauchamp’s anecdotes, which they witnessed or, in the case of one solider, heard about contemporaneously.

    OK, so at least 4 of them witnessed the incidents firsthand, right? And if they all corroborated his anecdotes, they saw all of them, right? Let’s continue to the mocking the burned woman in the crowded chow hall in Iraq Kuwait incident corroboration:

    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.”

    Hmmmm… Vacation or rigorous reporting? Vacation or rigorous reporting?

    Look out Hamptons! Here I come!

    tw: remained frothy

  39. Pablo says:

    “How you do this (I’ve seen it done more than once) is, when you approach the dog in question, suddenly lurch the Bradley on the opposite side of the road the dog is on. The rear-end of the vehicle will then swing TOWARD the animal, scaring it into running out into the road.

    Scaring it into running toward the BFV? Hmmmmm……

  40. Synova says:

    If he and his friend were taunting the woman with the scarred face in Kuwait on the way to Iraq it ruins the main thesis entirely… that the behavior was due to the dehumanizing nature of war. He was subhuman before he ever went to war.

    The timing of that one *matters*.

    (It also changes the dynamics and the things that seemed so wrong about the story. At the DFAC in Kuwait the people who may have overheard at least part of the taunting may well have been from vastly different chains of command and would have had a different sense of their responsibility.)

  41. Sean M. says:

    Kuwait, Iraq, what’s the difference? After all, Saddam thought they were the same thing.

  42. Rob Crawford says:

    Kuwait, Iraq, what’s the difference? After all, Saddam thought they were the same thing.

    Interesting point! As I recall, the left agreed with him.

  43. N. O'Brain says:

    Comment by mojo on 8/2 @ 11:15 pm #

    Just got a brand new set of three cast iron skillets. Gotta start seasoning them.

  44. TomB says:

    You know Jeff, the funniest thing about this whole incident is that John Cole works himself up into a lather over the “silence” on the right concerning Beauchamp, only to have his indignant screed explode in his face just hours after writing.

    nihilism ended,

    as if….

  45. Slartibartfast says:

    You guys don’t understand how the Army pre-coarsens troops being sent to the combat zone. I hear it involves killing a few kids stateside, in way of preparation.

    And then eating their brains. With a spoon.

    TW: laws acceptance.

  46. Sgt. Mom says:

    So assemble a narrative from incidents which took place at different times and different places, exaggerate a little for effect, create or embellish conversations and characters…
    I do that all the time, but at least I have the decency to call my stuff “historical fiction”.
    And I’m a better writer than STB… but then so is practically every other milblogger.

  47. scott thomas says:

    Dude, I could name names if they hadn’t taken my cell phone away.

    The worst part though was they took away my dvd player. Now I can’t watch the fresh shipment of midgets riding cats that just came in.

  48. T-web says:

    Beauchamp’s Kuwait/Iraq lie won’t matter to the netroots. They have two distinct ways of talking about the military, and use whichever one advances their goals at a given moment: One is that soldiers are poor stupid kids duped into going to war and doing Bushco’s bidding, and are therefore worthy of pity. The other is that soldiers are babykilling monsters by their nature. Since Beauchamp mocked a disfigured woman before going to war–by the way, you got quite a catch there Elspeth!–the incident will be used to show the intrinsic evil of the military

  49. She’s out on a limb here, and I have the gut feeling she’s looking for a plausible excuse to be talked out of that conclusion

    LOL. Honestly, you’re so silly.

  50. […] 3rd, 2007 · No Comments By Jeff Goldstein because he cracks me […]

  51. dwa says:

    It’s a good think Jeff didn’t link those posts, Scott, because Jesus Christ those things are horrible. What a curious bit of non-logic in the second one; because atrocities have happened in the past, we must lend credence to all allegations that may ever come up until proven otherwise? And you have the gall to accuse the individual questioning you as trolling? Literally all the “evidence” you have to go on are the Vietnam memoirs you’ve taught to classes. That’s it. You’ve provided not a God-damned thing else as evidence. We must have faith that you are correct because you say so. What a (and I apologize for lowering the tone here) fucking joke.

  52. Aldo says:

    One thing that is starting to bother me is the way that it is gradually becoming the conventional wisdom that the only error in the stories was the Iraq/Kuwait substitution. In fact, the pieces are rife with distortions.

    Good run-down here

  53. Pablo says:

    Now, now, dwa. Scott really isn’t interested in whether Beauchamp’s tales are true or false. He’s only concerned that the VRWC attacked him so mercilessly when when stories are so utterly truthy as compared to Vietnam memoirs.

    Of course, he’s provided exactly no evidence of that, so, you know, game on.

    tw: Deathbed ones, dancing with brainpans…

  54. Pablo says:

    And now the Army has concluded it’s investigation. Haven’t gone through it yet, but taking it from the top:

    After a thorough investigation that lasted nearly a week the 4th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, 1st Infantry Division has concluded that the allegation made by Private Thomas Scott Beauchamp, the “Baghdad Diarist”, have been “refuted by members of his platoon and proven to be false”

    We should find out why they’re lying any time now.

  55. Pablo says:

    Eh. Not much meat on that bone. Stay tuned, I suppose.

  56. timb says:

    I’m still laughing as a matter of fact. And, just to clarify, you’re hanging your hat on “The New Republic and six military lied”? Just so I know.

    As for what I think about soldiers and Marines, I know a few. My brother-in-law agreed the guy was a prick, but that he saw things like that in Basrah.

    Not sure what you hope to accomplish by not moving on…after all sort of highlights the fact that you and most of your followers were a) wrong and b) know close to nothing about what really happens in war.

    Funny, I could pull from the archives a million stories and posts about how the stuff at Abu Garib was not that bad AND highlight your support of the President’s torture policies. I could place it next to this selective outrage over Beauchamp and his friends callous cruelty. Then, I could watch you twist yourselves into pretzels differentiating your outrage at callousness and your lack of outrage re: criminal acts.

    Oh, hold it, I guess I did highlight it.

    You want to impugn me, because you were wrong, then more power to you and the wisdom of your friends here, but next time, before you go around declaring people liars, you might want to have more proof than Ace. Just saying.

    Oh, well, off for the weekend to giggle at all of you. I trust you can insult me without my presence? Or Sirota? Or whomever this week’s enemy is. Keep trying on the media front. You all will get those traitors someday!

  57. sherlock says:

    I am confused. Which claim did “Scott Thomas” make?:

    a. I am a callous dipshit. I saw a woman with a burned and disfigured face, and I joined in mocking her, loudly enough for her to hear and run away crying.

    b. I am a sensitive person, but the Iraq war made me act like a callous dipshit. I saw a woman with a burned and disfigured face, and I joined in mocking her, loudly enough for her to hear and run away crying.

  58. Slartibartfast says:

    Next, showing the documentary films Full Metal Jacket and Platoon.

    Because that kind of shit actually happened.

  59. Slartibartfast says:

    Really, no shit:

    I went hunting with some friends, and one of us got gang-buggered by hillbillies. We killed them all, of course.

    True story.

  60. macgruder says:

    weird. how to reconcile the army’s official investigation with TNR’s investigation. someone’s lying, for starters.

  61. Patrick Chester says:

    timb claimed:

    Funny, I could pull from the archives a million stories and posts about how the stuff at Abu Garib was not that bad AND highlight your support of the President’s torture policies.

    But you won’t.
    TW: been riots

  62. Karl says:

    Timmah,

    No one is arguing that STB and six other military lied, not least because TNR supposedly “spoke with five other members of Beauchamp’s company,” not six.

    No, what is being pointed out — not argued — is that the so-called “corroboraton” in fact does not match what STB wrote in the original articles. And that TNR chose to ignore the questions raised in the other articles (about changing a run-flat tire on patrol, Glocks=Iraqi Police, etc.) And that the error TNR to which TNR fully admits completely guts the thesis of “Shock Troops,” which was that STB was dehumanized by the war.

    It’s almost funny that you — and others like you — are making the “but look at other examples” gambit, when that directly contradicts TNR’s claim that this was just meant to be STB’s personal story. Don’t you believe TNR when they assert that?

    You did do a nice job of copying down the talking points I’ve seen at Lefy websites though.

  63. Rob Crawford says:

    I’m still laughing as a matter of fact. And, just to clarify, you’re hanging your hat on “The New Republic and six military lied”? Just so I know.

    You’re hanging your hat on TNR being honest? On TNR bothering to fact-check a story that conforms to their biases? On the home of Stephen Glass?

    Good luck with that.

    If Sanchez has the final results right, what will you do?

  64. Obstreperous Infidel says:

    Timmuh, you really and truly are, for lack of a better term, a dumb mother fucker. No other way around that son.

    Nobody is saying that bad people don’t do bad things in war. Nobody. The problem with your newest masterbatory fantasy is that he’s a complete sack of opportunistic shit. Probably, not much unlike yourself. It has been said time and time again, but here’s one more time. He crafted his “narrative” before he ever got to war. Whether, what he says is true or not, is not really the case. I am sure he witnessed some pretty dehumanizing shit. But, again, you fucking loser, it doesn’t impugn the whole military. Ony him and his fellow assholes. But, at least in regards to the Iraq/Kuwait part (what the hell, these brown people all look the same anyway), the WHERE was really fucking important. As it sets your boy’s “narrative” of war turning people into dehumanizing zombies. No amount of SEK’s (who, btw, is obviously the ONLY lefty in this place that has a brain) protestations can change that fact.

  65. Pablo says:

    Bob Owens is working the Kuwait angle.

    This morning, I contact Major Renee D. Russo, Third Army USARCENT PAO in Kuwait, to ask her if she knew of “a female civilian contractor at Camp Buehring with severe facial burns, and if so, when” she was there.

    Here is her emailed response, in full.

    Mr. Owens,

    We have received other media queries on the alleged incident, but have
    not been able to find anyone to back it up. There is not a police
    report or complaint filed on this incident during that timeframe. Right now it is considered to be a Urban Legend or Myth.

    I am still researching the incident and will have to get back with you
    later with any new developments.

  66. SmokeVanThorn says:

    I see timmy is gone for the weekend – do you think it’s the Kim Possible marathon on ABC or the Dark Shadows convention?

  67. Jeff G. says:

    You hear that, Shakespeare’s Sister? Timmy B says you ain’t a real lefty — or else you’ve been duped by the rapid rightwing crazies.

    You gonna take that shit?

    ….

    SLAP FIGHT!

    Timmy. I asked you before to go away, and you just kind of snuck your way back in here. If you think so poorly of me, I have to wonder what it is you and heet, to name but two, think you’re getting out of hanging out here, showing your asses all the time?

    The image of you giggling at us all weekend really puts me in high spirits, for some reason. Me, I’m going to spend my weekend blissfully unaware that you even exist.

    A tale of two cities, as it were.

  68. N. O'Brain says:

    “Funny, I could pull from the archives a million stories and posts about how the stuff at Abu Garib was not that bad AND highlight your support of the President’s torture policies.”

    ‘Smatter, timmah, jealous?

  69. Jeff G. says:

    I should add, though, that I find this new tactic being trotted out by heet and timmah pretty interesting. If, on a blog, you disagree with what someone has written and you take on their argument, you are “attacking” them. They are this week’s “target” — which is presented in terms of their being “victimized” by challenges to their positions.

    It’s moronic, naturally, but at the same time, it makes me glow to think that I can, by simple dint of looking their way, be victimizing them.

    With me evil. And my barrage of wordy words and awesome awesomeness.

    I wonder how it feels for those who’ve long preached the victimization of oppressed classes — while thinking themselves superior to all they pretend to champion — to find themselves suddenly on the end of timmah and heet’s pity, simply because I’ve tended to smash a few flies and drop them into the ointment of professors or authors or professional political consultants.

    Widdle ol’ me, the big bad wolf?

    You make me blush, you do.

  70. Karl says:

    “Funny, I could pull from the archives a million stories and posts about how the stuff at Abu Garib was not that bad AND highlight your support of the President’s torture policies.”

    Funny, I could link to Timmah acting like a complete jackass the last time Jeff was having to address a psycho cyber-stalker. And point out that as compassionate libs go, Timmah is right up there with STB. Which might explain why he swallowed the STB BS so readily.

    Or not so funny.

  71. Rob Crawford says:

    I should add, though, that I find this new tactic being trotted out by heet and timmah pretty interesting. If, on a blog, you disagree with what someone has written and you take on their argument, you are “attacking” them. They are this week’s “target” — which is presented in terms of their being “victimized” by challenges to their positions.

    Well, quoting someone is “smearing” them; questioning someone’s claims is “attacking” them, and now, expressing disagreement is “victimizing” them.

    Gotta wonder how long it will be before they convince a legislator to try to make that into a law.

  72. Jeff G. says:

    Oh, and Melissa? It was just a gut feeling. I could be way off, and I freely admit that.

    I think the Iraq/Kuwait problem — though you incorrectly state that it’s the only point of fact that has been troubled by subsequent investigations — is singularly insurmountable for Beauchamp’s defenders (as I wrote to Scott Eric Kaufman in the previous thread), and for the reasons you eloquently pointed out.

    But Scott and others have a way of trying to “intellectualize” the argument to create a plausible cushion to cram between the space where Beauchamp is a lying opportunist and a martyr to the vitriol of the right wing.

    I have considered and given credence to the possibility that Beauchamp’s memory failed him. Perhaps he has misplaced the moment of his epiphany as a way to repress his own “coarsened” behavior toward the disfigured woman, which happened before he went to combat — in effect, allowing himself to blame his own moral and social failings on a convenient, stylized, and frankly hackneyed scapegoat (the Horrors of War).

    But I’m not a psychologist, so I can only go by what the facts tell me — namely, that he thought himself the next great poet setting out to provide himself with absolute moral authority to write agitprop from the perspective of a soldier.

    So great is his ego, it is my reading, that he couldn’t even wait. And that, ultimately, is what sunk him.

    YMMV

  73. MarkD says:

    I want a Glock that shoots square bullets. I think that story comes from the Crusades.

    I cannot remember where I read this, but the Pope proclaimed that you were only allowed to use round headed bolts in your crossbow if you were shooting fellow Christians. The square headed ones were OK for Muslims.

  74. DrSteve says:

    I had wondered how timb found his way back in here. The image I have of him cackling over whatever scraps of the Beauchamp story he can manage to Duhem-Quine for himself is vile. Hey, timb, the pepper steak in that “chow hall” in Kuwait may have turned Beauchamp into a prick — what’s your excuse?

    I get the impression this is about more than who has a good grip on “what really happens in a war.” It’s about this punk Beauchamp target-marketing a military hit piece that’s pitch-perfect for the confirmation biases of the antiwar left, and the predictable response thereto from its intended audience.

  75. ccs says:

    Not if y’all are makin’ it right – cast iron skillets being, yes, round…

    Actually Mojo, I happen to own a 9″ square cast iron shillet ………

  76. Paul Zrimsek says:

    This just in: The woman with the burned face was Lucy Ramirez!

  77. […] was struck by a bit of an epiphany earlier today as I read through Jeff’s entry on TNR’s post hoc “validation” of Beauchamp’s fabulism: we […]

  78. Time will tell of course, but I’m betting that that bulk of Beauchamp’s writing will be fiction.

  79. Aldo says:

    Time will tell of course, but I’m betting that that bulk of Beauchamp’s writing will be fiction.

    Based on what we already know, it is. He had to write some fables in order to de-mythologize the war (like destroying the village to save it), and now he is being swiftboated by his platoon.

  80. LionDude says:

    I think we’re all forgetting the fact that overseas wars not only coarsen soldiers, but it knocks down bridges at home. Bridges, man!!

    Anyone want to start a donation fund to supply Heet and Timmah with a new Hummer and endless gas to keep driving over the Bay Bridge? Either the next Big One will get ’em (caused by global warming and the Iraq War), or nude Berkeley progressives will attack their Hummer with Whole Foods recyclable tote bags.

  81. […] in a tea pot. But given that Beauchamp’s pieces and their subsequent discrediting have illuminated questions about how mythologies are created and / or reinforced — and given that we have been told that a story’s “significance” is often […]

  82. RiverC says:

    Matt C: I think somewhere along the lines “You will achieve” went from being a statement of encouragement to one of entitlement. I think it happened when we stopped calling the losers out – yes, it hurts to be a loser, but no pain no gain – and therefore lied to each other and ourselves. In fact, the only way to succeed in this society is to become self aware enough to recognize your own failings, but to also steel yourself towards achievement. Without both, you cannot hope to succeed.

  83. Rob Crawford says:

    This just in: The woman with the burned face was Lucy Ramirez!

    I LOL’d.

  84. Jeffersonian says:

    I hearby pronounce this kerfuffle “TNR ‘Jengis’ Con Job 2007”

    TW: spring boyish…does that include lampooning those disfigured by having an IED seared…SEARED…into their faces?

  85. Patrick Chester says:

    Major John wrote:

    Man, I sure missed all the fun – looting, pillaging, etc. Maybe next time around I can take care of that glaring ommission.

    Well, here’s a Helpful Guide for you! ;)

    TW: juries. camp – where you learn to get very bored and get rejected by lawyers as a possible candidate.

  86. Dan Collins says:

    Thing about the end zone dance is, it looks funny when you don’t have the ball.

Comments are closed.