TNR Snarks
posted at 1:30 pm on July 21, 2007 by Bryan
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
Howard Kurtz gets TNR’s Franklin Foer on the line to chat about “Scott Thomas.” Foer, disappointingly, offers snark instead of substantive answers to the many questions swirling around New Republic’s “Baghdad Diarist.”
As the criticism mounts, Foer says he sees an ideological agenda.
“A lot of the questions raised by the conservative blogosphere boil down to, would American soldiers be capable of doing things like the things described in the diarist. The practical jokes are exceptionally mild compared to things that have been documented by the U.S. military. Conservative bloggers make a bit of a living denying any bad news that emanates from Iraq.”
That’s demonstrably not true, Mr. Foer. It is, however, true beyond the shadow of a doubt that liberal pundits and blogs make a handsome living off denying any good news that emanates from Iraq and playing up any bad news that comes from Iraq. Have you heard Jack Murtha acknowledge that he grossly overstated the Haditha case? Have you read the post in which Glenn Greenwald acknowledges the “Anbar awakening?” Didn’t think so. Murtha’s too busy stuffing his face with pork and Greenwald is too busy writing impenetrable posts about his bestseller to bother acknowledging reality.
And it’s true that there are enough holes in “Scott Thomas’” writings to drive a Bradley through. That’s what started the criticism in the first place.
It’s also not true that the criticism boils down to “would American soldiers be capable of doing things like the things described in the diarist”? We all know that humans are capable of great monstrosity and Americans aren’t exempt from that. The criticism in this case boils down to how well do the allegations published by TNR stand up to scrutiny based on verifiable facts. And the allegations don’t hold up too well. It’s still possible that “Scott Thomas” actually experienced everything that he claims; Foer’s two public statements on the matter do absolutely nothing to suggest that he’s seriously looking into the matter and that he is treating the criticism that’s been leveled at “Thomas” fairly. He’s playing defense by going on offense, not by basic fact-finding.
Given Foer’s smear as quoted by Kurtz, he should not be be trusted when he comes out in a few days or weeks and says “It’s all true. I can’t show you any evidence or introduce you to a single corroborating witness, so you’ll just have to take my word for it.” No sale. Foer has done nothing to earn anyone’s trust, and his magazine has a peculiar history that mandates a very careful and thorough investigation and a very honest and complete rendering of a verdict. It doesn’t look like we’ll get that from Foer.
What Foer and TNR will get if they hunker down and keep lashing out at legitimate criticism is some nutroots cred for publishing smears of US troops in combat. Sad to say, that may be the end goal here.
Update (AP): The public affairs office at FOB Falcon is skeptical, to say the least.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Maybe Foer will say that Scott Thomas is “fake but accurate.”
MoxArgon on July 21, 2007 at 1:37 PM
The emperor apparently a) has no clothes and b) doesn’t want to admit it.
I’ve not the time at the moment to read the article, but if the entire defense consists of deflection and smear, I don’t need the bother.
Which conservative blogosphere would this be? Can’t seem to find it anywhere.
TexasDan on July 21, 2007 at 1:47 PM
The new liberal media mantra “Fake but accurate”
William Amos on July 21, 2007 at 2:04 PM
Is it really possible that TNR would become even more hysterical and histrionic after St. Andrew Sullivan left?
This episode perfectly illustrates how thoroughly liberal institutions have debased themselves after 9/11.
billy on July 21, 2007 at 2:10 PM
All he has is snark? Whenever a media type responds with no substance and “motive” attack it pretty much spells out - they got had.
Think Dan Rather about now.
Topsecretk9 on July 21, 2007 at 2:23 PM
Bryan,
You’ve been on quite a roll lately.
PRCalDude on July 21, 2007 at 2:26 PM
Hmm, I guess he considers every single Military Blog out there which has called BS on this to be “conservative”? Nice try.
We have Blackfive, Mudville Gazette, NRO THE TANK, Dadmanly, Michael Yon and then all the comments from military members and veterans on those sites all calling BS.
As someone rightly pointed out on a Military Blog I read, the Right links to people such as Michael Yon, while the Left links to these smears of the military.
It is pretty clear which side of the ideological aisle actually supports the military.
Michael in MI on July 21, 2007 at 2:29 PM
Also, here is the reason why it is so important to debunk these smears and debunk them publicly and loudly: Because the Left believes what they’re told to believe.
Michael in MI on July 21, 2007 at 2:31 PM
An “anonymous source” is exactly the same thing as an “imaginary friend.”
And now they’re actually going so far as to pin FAKE NAMES on their sock puppets? Of course we need to keep making fun of the idiots, but we must also keep in mind that each step the liberal media takes in making itself more obviously crazy is another victory for our cause.
logis on July 21, 2007 at 2:33 PM
And after this is thoroughly debunked, the left will still believe it. You know, selected not elected, TANG memos, ad nauseum.
In my experience, the left just doesn’t learn from experience. I mean, how dense do you have to be to take socialism seriously?
Merovign on July 21, 2007 at 2:34 PM
Hmmmmm? That sentence works both ways.
TunaTalon on July 21, 2007 at 2:46 PM
double ditto.
reine.de.tout on July 21, 2007 at 4:27 PM
Just got an answer from a wonderful female contractor that is actually over in Iraq, with direct experience in a lot of the basic situations in the various stories from ‘Scott Thomas’.
I didn’t think to ask permission to post her whole reply, so I won’t; but here is her ’summation’:
The rest of her analysis of the specifics in the different stories is pretty much the same as most of ours.
God help ‘Scott Thomas’ if she ever runs across him. ;-)
LegendHasIt on July 21, 2007 at 5:33 PM
What really irks me is that I’m no longer surprised at how low the left will stoop to get their way. And to publish these “stories” without any verification of their authenticity immediately brings into question Foer’s journalistic integrity. Of course, I question the integrity of the entire MSM, so I guess I can just lump him on in there with them.
Kowboy on July 21, 2007 at 6:02 PM
“Progressive” types seem to be good at this sort of thing. Make things up. Fake names. Fake body counts in Iraq. The admin. was behind 9-11. Nothing new to see here. But gotta have the Fairness Doctrine to control Talk Radio. It’s all they don’t have.
You see, until the internet, TNR, NYT etc could print all the garbage they wanted. Sure you could send a letter to the editor. But they didn’t have to print it. Now with websites, they actually have to defend this crap. And end up like Foer. Throwing stones (names) because he has nothing else.
PowWow on July 21, 2007 at 6:10 PM
TNR lies. So is Foer. So does the MSM.
The time is going to come, ladies and gentlemen, when propaganda sheets like TNR (and the NY Times) are going to be reduced to “hobby” publications with circulation number in the low 1000’s.
Even the leftist editor of Editor and Publisher notes that the PEW center is consistently reporting that American’s trust of the media is rapidly deteriorating.
Foer apparently thinks he can ride this out. He’s mistaken.
georgej on July 21, 2007 at 7:12 PM
It seems that all liberals with a voice/platform are in full throttle mode to get democraps elected next year. Lie, cheat, steal, it doesn’t matter, the end justifies the means. Slander our troops, no problem if it works… These cowards are despicable and have sinned against our country.
Major Kirk Luedeke’s response was calm and considered. It appears less likely that any of the assertions made by “Scott Thomas” have any basis in truth.
Zorro on July 21, 2007 at 7:19 PM
Bryan or AP, do you know if Michelle will be bringing this up with O’Reilly? I feel like that’s the only way enough pressure will be brought to get to the bottom of this obvious hoax.
RightWinged on July 21, 2007 at 8:14 PM
Good good good that you posted this Bryan. When TNR inevitably recants, it will be nice to be able to list which TNR reporters supported this hogwash. Franklin Foer is on that list.
Kevin M on July 21, 2007 at 8:53 PM
If by “be capable of doing” he means “be willing to do,” and if by “a lot” he means “relatively few,” he’s dead on.
Alternately, if by “be capable of doing” he means “actually find it possible to do,” then he’s also right.
Unfortunately, in the end Bryan is right. Once it gets disseminated by the Ministry of Truth, the job is already done. The actual truth is irrelevant.
Blacklake on July 21, 2007 at 9:37 PM
From the Kurtz piece:
So important, in fact, that Foer had no answer for them, even though he claimed in the Plank that he was getting corroborating info.
The mass grave is going to be TNR’s undoing here. FOB flatly denies the existence of said mass grave. Mass graves in Iraq are amply and independently documented, so the PAO at FOB Falcon is not going to flatly deny its existence unless it does not exist.
TNR is also going to have to produce experts other than anonymous people presumably e-mailing from Iraq that will explain how someone could hit a dog with the BFV in the manner described. I’m skeptical that TNR will be able to do so.
And if either of those two major holes is left open in these “diaries,” all of the other wrong details (the square casing, Glocks = Iraqi police, not knowing Army lingo uniforms, etc. will be unable to be explained away as a soldier not writing to a professional level.
Karl on July 21, 2007 at 11:15 PM
I still think the one detail from this story that would be the easiest to verify is the existance of this woman. Contrary to the anti-war propaganda, there are not thousands upon thousands of horrifically injured and disfigured soldiers. There are some soldiers who have some terrible injuries from which they will never recover and every one of them is a hero in my mind, but the fact is there aren’t as many as people think. The majority of people wounded in this conflict return to duty within 72 hours, meaning no lost limbs, broken bones or melted faces.
BohicaTwentyTwo on July 23, 2007 at 8:52 AM