But, late last week, the Army began its own investigation, short-circuiting our efforts. Beauchamp had his cell-phone and computer taken away and is currently unable to speak to even his family.

When presented with this important discrepancy, Beauchamp acknowledged his error.

How was Beauchamp able to acknowledge his error when he was unable to speak to even his family?

Also, Sanchez has a new post up about 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…

BTW, thanks for the comment. :-)

Sully is now allowing that righty critics have point (as opposed to his original TNR is honorable post) but of course instead of grappling with the true implications goes on to whine about the critics.

Topsecretk9 on August 2, 2007 at 11:13 PM

Well, so much for the sloppiness angle. I tried to keep an open mind. :-)

However, I did catch the “Saddam-era mass grave” (as Beauchamp originally characterized it) versus “children’s cemetery” misdirection play at my blog (Michelle threw me a link on that post at her other blog.)

As for the mass grave, why would clothes and sandals, etc., be found ABOVE the bones? Do they have special soil over there? or did Saddam bury the bodies naked throwing the clothes on top of the dirt covered bodies?

As for the melted lady, he is a liar. Nobody who witnessed such a site would forget anything about seeing something such as that, particularly if that person were cruelly ridiculed, especially what COUNTRY it was supposedly in.

As for the Bradley…I’ve driven one, and yeah they are maneuverable, but it does nothing to answer the question of some soldier deliberately maneuvering one to run over dogs.

Who gives a damn how maneuverable it is, answer the question of whether it was used to run over dogs, the story that painted soldiers as so uncaring as to wantonly kill even animals.

As for any animal “flocking towards noisy convoys”, I cannot imagine ANY animal, other than the Al Queda type, that would do so. What BS!

Beauchamp had his cell-phone and computer taken away and is currently unable to speak to even his family. His fellow soldiers no longer feel comfortable communicating with reporters. If further substantive information comes to light, TNR will, of course, share it with you.

Ahhh waaahhh. Good on the military to snatch up his ability to spread more lies and smear more soldiers.

Would any soldier feel comfortable “communicating with reporters” if what was “reported” was so false?

As for sharing, perhaps TNR should share some truth.

They will look very stupid if any media organization (including Hotair (hint) submits a FOIA for the AR 15-6 investigation report) finds the facts of their investigation. Having been involved in one in the past, many little details will be found out….and I doubt TNR will dutifully report on it.

Second: There was a children’s cemetery unearthed while constructing a Combat Outpost (COP) in the farm land south of Baghdad International Airport. It was not a mass grave. It was not the result of some inhumane genocide. It was an unmarked cometary where the locals had buried children some years back. There are many such unmarked cemeteries in and around Baghdad. The remains unearthed that day were transported to another location and reburied. While I was not there personally, and can not confirm or deny and actions taken by Soldiers that day, I can tell you that no Soldier put a human skull under his helmet and wore it around. The Army Combat Helmet (ACH) is form fitted to the head. Unlike the old Kevlar helmets, the ACH does not have a gap between the helmet and the liner, only pads. It would have been impossible for him to have placed and human skull, of any size, between his helmet and his head. Further more, no leader would have tolerated this type of behavior. This type of behavior is strictly forbidden in the U.S. Army and would have made the individual involved subject to UCMJ actions.

We contacted the New Republic in order to get any information that might help us to verify the authenticity of “Thomas”‘s disturbing account, and the magazine, while insisting that it had promised to protect the identity of the author to shield him from retribution by the military, did provide us with some additional details. “Scott Thomas” claims that the incident at the chow hall occurred at Forward Operating Base Falcon. And the mass grave, he says, was discovered a couple miles south of Baghdad International Airport in farmland. We have also contacted the Pentagon in the hopes of getting more information to either corroborate or disprove “Thomas”‘s account.

When asked the location STB said it was Forward Operating Base Falcon and just 2 days later Feor said:

I’ve spoken extensively with the author of the piece and have communicated with other soldiers who witnessed the events…these conversations have done nothing to undermine–and much to corroborate–the author’s descriptions.

So again – either Feor was lying or the witness (s?) were because of course there was a “undermine” it wasn’t FOB Falcon…and

And the mass grave, he says, was discovered a couple miles south of Baghdad International Airport in farmland.

then today, it’s a Cemetery

But one military official told TNR that bones were commonly found in the area around Beauchamp’s combat outpost. (This is consistent with the report of a children’s cemetery near Beauchamp’s combat outpost reported on The Weekly Standard website.)

It was published on the 13th, then July 18 Golfarb first raised a flag and on July 20th Feor said

I’ve spoken extensively with the author of the piece and have communicated with other soldiers who witnessed the events described in the diarist. Thus far, these conversations have done nothing to undermine–and much to corroborate–the author’s descriptions. I will let you know more after we complete our investigation.

on July 20 – plural

then on July 28th he said

At least one soldier in the unit had already confirmed the events described, Mr. Foer said, but the magazine plans, “to the extent possible,” to “re-report every detail,” a task made more difficult now that Private Beauchamp cannot easily communicate with anyone overseas.

A low life-scumbag.

Which makes him a low-like scumbag.

Or, if he’s lying, he’s merely a traitorous scumbag.

Choices, choices…

Sounds pretty easy to confuse with the spartan facilities at FOB Falcon. Not.

In an interview with ABC last week, TNR editor Frank Foer said that he had “talked to one of the members of [Beauchamp's FOB Falcon] unit to confirm the woman, a female contractor”–referring to the existence of a disfigured woman at that location who was allegedly harassed by Scott Beauchamp and friend at FOB Falcon in Iraq.

Baldilocks – I specualted it was Matt Sanchez’s email to WS that prompted TNR to admit Beaucamp lied or the person he contacted did confirm it – only after Sanchez’s email it suddenly shifted to Camp Buehring. In either case, I think it was Sanchez’s email and either scenario it’s very slimy.

And, eventually, we reached the bones. All children’s bones: tiny cracked tibias and shoulder blades. We found pieces of hands and fingers. We found skull fragments. No one cared to speculate what, exactly, had happened here, but it was clearly a Saddam-era dumping ground of some sort.

I wonder if the average TNR reader’s attitude toward the story would significantly change if it was (improbably) proven that this was the site of a former abortion clinic.

Didn’t Dan Rather try that once?

contacted *** a *** corroborating witness

um- that’s really, really bad and a pretty slimy way to sneak it in.

This makes the new story even more damning. It wasn’t an incident that occurred with a stranger he had seen once, it was (supposedly) someone he saw on a regular basis in familiar environs.

TallDave…a soldier comments to MMalkin

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.

All of Beauchamp’s essays were fact-checked before publication. We checked the plausibility of details with experts, contacted a corroborating witness, and pressed the author for further details. But publishing a first-person essay from a war zone requires a measure of faith in the writer. Given what we knew of Beauchamp, personally and professionally, we credited his report. After questions were raised about the veracity of his essay, TNR extensively re-reported Beauchamp’s account.

Sanchez emails Michelle…

Michelle:
I 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.

It’s difficult to imagine anyone could confuse a DFAC (dinning facility) in Kuwait, with one in Baghdad. I’d like to see the list of military experts TNR consulted prior to publishing the story…

This makes the new story even more damning. It wasn’t an incident that occurred with a stranger he had seen once, it was (supposedly) someone he saw on a regular basis in familiar environs.

Only now, we find out it happened during a presumably brief sojourn of a few days. At a temporary staging base. In another country. Nine months earlier.

Why don’t you try again, TNR?