It is official! One hundred percent of soldiers, when asked, state that no, they do not want an Article 15:
To your question: Were there any truth to what was being said by Thomas?
Answer: An investigation of the allegations were conducted by the command and found to be false. In fact, members of Thomas’ platoon and company were all interviewed and no one could substantiate his claims.
As to what will happen to him?
Answer: As there is no evidence of criminal conduct, he is subject to Administrative punishment as determined by his chain of command. Under the various rules and regulations, administrative actions are not releasable to the public by the military on what does or does not happen.
Intrepid defender of the troops Bob Owens with the “scoop.” Our brave defender of the soldiers honor opines:
Let’s look at that once more: “members of Thomas’ platoon and company were all interviewed and no one could substantiate his claims.”
Presumably thorough, in-person interviews of all of Alpha Company, 1/18 Infantry, Second Brigade Combat Team, First Infantry Division, and Beauchamp’s platoon within Alpha Company by military investigators, and not one of those soldiers could confirm Beauchamp’s stories as told in The New Republic.
Note that the investigation didn’t just stop by stating that the claims were uncorroborated; Col. Boylan states categorically that Beauchamp’s allegations were false. Not a lot of wiggle room there.
But what about the OPSEC violations! NO CRIMES? DOES THAT MEAN NO EXECUTIONS FOR TREASON?
And no- these were not proven “false.” Not in any sense of the word- not from interviews alone. What it means is that the military can’t corroborate it, and of course they can’t- what idiot is going to cop to what Beauchamp described under the threat of punishment? Seriously. If interviews were the only thing done in this investigation, it proves nothing (“O.J.- did you kill your wife? No? Ok.”).
And this is not to blame this on the military or the poor bastards at the Public Affairs Office who have been dealing with idiots like Owens for the past two weeks- what are they supposed to do? Search for canine corpses in the desert? Go the the KBR records and line up a name with every meal served in Kuwait?
No- they did the only thing they could do- they asked the soldiers, and surprising no one, found no one willing to cop to the behavior. Again, this should come as NO surprise, and only in the world of make believe would this mean that the story is finished. Kudo’s to Allahpundit for asking the right questions:
NR claims to have corroborated the various elements of Beauchamp’s story with five different members of his company, four of whom had firsthand knowledge of the incidents. The statement Bob got suggests (but doesn’t quite explicitly say) that every last man in the company was interviewed and, to quote the spokesman, “no one could substantiate [Beauchamp’s] claims.” Assuming both Foer and the spokesman are telling the truth, five guys in the squad are lying to someone. They all have a motive to tell the Army the incidents never happened given the trouble they’d be in for not reporting them at the time; assuming they’re all friends of Beauchamp and want to protect him from a career-destroying mistake, they also all have a motive to tell TNR that the incidents happened the way he said. (Although if they’re lying to TNR, why then dispute the location of burned woman incident? Why not just corroborate him on that detail too? Maybe because there are too many people at FOB Falcon who could disprove it?)
Unless the Army comes up with compelling evidence disproving his story it’s going to end up as the military version of a he said/she said where each side simply believes whom they’d prefer ideologically to believe and leaves it at that. Let’s hope what they’ve got is as specific as Goldfarb’s quote implies.
Allah is probably right. At any rate, hopefully a few things will happen:
1.) Bob Owens and the other nitwits will leave these guys at the Public Affairs office alone and let them get on to more important things. Like, for example, fighting a war- one that really isn’t going very swimmingly. I am betting their 100% attention to that would probably be a good thing.
2.) Scott Beauchamp will get his computer back and will be allowed to talk to his parents again.
3.) Somewhere in Greater Wingnuttia®, someone will cry that a little extra duty is not punishment enough, and I will be blessed with another week’s worth of easy blogging material- making fun of really, really stupid people.
Finally, let me close with the observation that it is Doug Feith’s profound misfortune that Tommy Franks never met Bob Owens.
*** Update ***
Mandatory Troll Disclaimer- Thinking this investigation as currently described proves nothing in no way means that I think Beauchamp’s writings are accurate, nor do I want them to be true. Nor do I want the terrorists to win, nor do I hate America, nor do I plan to move to France and share a condo with Barbra Streisand.
*** Update #2 ***
The whooshing, clattering sound you hear is the strict rules of evidence that they so recently applied to the New Republic being slam-dunked into wastebaskets, as the broad official denial suddenly becomes the gold standard of investigative research.
mike montague
It’s sad that you can not admit that you were wrong. Classy.
IanY77
Well crap, now I got nothing. I suppose I’ll just change the cat’s litter and take a nap. Thanks a lot, ass.
cleek
sharp-eyed readers will note how JC declined to elaborate on his peculiar relationship with Hanoy Jane Kerry-Fonda and Cindy Sheehan, however. this convenient omission speaks volumes about his veracity and where Cole’s real loyalties lie.
jake
I’m not getting the unsubstantiated claims = LIES ALL LIES reasoning. Oh well.
I’m also not getting why allegations of dog squashing and other shitty (but not evil) behaviors caused so much pants wetting.
Is this all a way to distract themselves from the Haditha verdict or the Tillman investigation or just the entire clusterfuck that is The Wah Against Terra?
cleek
they’re just trying to collect MSM scalps. the substance is secondary (at best).
jake
All of this talk about blogs has reminded me, if you’re not already reading it, check out The Sandbox.
I just picked the above linked at random. The man knows how to string words together and since we’ve been discussing M. Sanchez, this passage caught my eye:
Marc
Do wingnuts have a credibility switch they can just turn off and on?
Give them the wildest story about Saddam, WMDs, or whatever, and they’re as credulous as three year olds, but a soldier sends in a story fact-checked by a news magazine older than Time, and there’s just no way it can happen.
I’d call them useful idiots, but i’m not sure if there’s much useful about them.
capelza
I think it was at ObWings that there was a post about the need to relive the “glory” of Rathergate. That they are reduced to going after a boy who writes badly about a dog being run over and heaven forbid making fun of someone less fortunate or even the slightly ghoulish skull cap incident is telling.
It’s like Bernstein and Woodward going after real plumbers, overcharging their customers for an extra half hour of work exposing their plumber’s butt (heh).
And shocked that the corraberating plumbers will not come forward to name themsleves, but rather pull their pants up and keep quiet. That’s a tough union!
Christ on a cracker, they will never get it, ever. Ever.
Except that now, since Matt Sachez has served his usefulness, I am curious as to his real future in wingnuttia. Like Jeff Gannon..hey, where IS that guy now?
Barry
Strain at gnats, swallow camels.
Doug H.
Wow, they must be desperate if they’re starting to eat their own. IMO, I thought it was the usual suspects going apoplectic over TNR even marginally toeing the line out of the ‘Everything Is Going Swell In Stalingrad’ reservation.
The Other Andrew
Even though I dislike country music, I’d be willing to share a condo in France with one of the Dixie Chicks. It depends on which one, though…
John Cole
I honestly don’t know- he seems like a decent person- he emailed me last night and was not snarling or the like, but I honestly do not know what is going on.
On one hand, you can not blame him- he may very seriously believe what he is writing, and honestly be looking forward to a career as an investigative journalist, so who can blame him for using the Malkins and the like for easy self-promotion. Rather shrewd, if you ask me.
On the other hand, part of me wants to think it is all a big spoof, and before the November elections next year he is going to recant everything he said and claim he was just doing it to demonstrate how quickly the wingnuts will throw aside their alleged principles to win an argument.
Whatever happens, I hope he is not the target of a focussed smear campaign. I am getting more than a little tired of those.
brock o. baum
C’mon, John Cole…think…the Army investigation determined every claim made by Beaucahmp was categorically false…meaning not true…meaning they never happened…meaning Beauchamp lied..
…now think…how could they determine this?…
…simple…by asking Beauchamp himself…
…the brass would not put themselves out there like that if there were witnesses to the contrary…why were these mysterious corroborators never named?..
…right…you got it…because they do not exist…
…why are you so willing to defend such ridiculous behavior by the MSM?..because it fit your agenda, maybe?..
brock o. baum
I honestly don’t know- he seems like a decent person- he emailed me last night and was not snarling or the like, but I honestly do not know what is going on.
..he’s obviously a better man than you..
cleek
brock, in the thread below, you said Beauchamp has admitted lying. do you have a cite for that ?
capelza
John, your inherent decency is why I come here, and did before you became a barking, crazy liberal. (I know you are not, btw.)
That would be the utter hilarious best if Sanchez was a spoof, but I don’t think so. That he may want to believe what he’s writing is a possibility. In a way he’s like Beauchamp, both wanting to make it in publishing or media. Both have gone about it the wrong way.
I do hope that the smear campaign does not delve into his wedding registry or drag his woman/man into it.
I think what gets me, besides the hypocrisy of the right in regards to his gay “past”, is that the guy is under investigation. I can find no articles on the web after the Marine Times one from April to say whether he was cleared or not. THAT should bother the wingnuts who support the troops more than anything. The guy was/is suspected and under official investigation for fraud, climbing up the backs of “real” soldiers who have been deployed for monetary gain.
For all the phoney handwringing about how Beauchamp’s TNR article “hurt” the troops, and also for the incredibly horrible hypocrisy of the right-wing to be the ones who actually made Beauchamp “famous”…that they’d not even stop for a minute and think about that.
jake
Sanchez will continue to be useful to them unless he is forced to leave the military due to bad behavior on his part. At that point Wingnuttia will announce itself deceived by the man and forget he ever existed. (Brief smear-a-thon optional.)
Sanchez will quickly find a new gig as … whatever he thinks works best for Matt Sanchez. Someone with the inside scoop on the dark twisted recesses of Wingnuttia is my bet.
brock o. baum
cleek Says:
brock, in the thread below, you said Beauchamp has admitted lying. do you have a cite for that ?
…look at my post a teensy bit up this thraed…that should answer your question…
brock o. baum
,i>I do hope that the smear campaign does not delve into his wedding registry or drag his woman/man into it.
…oh, please…you know that’s already happening…
cleek
no, it doesn’t. your assertions are meaningless.
so, i will ask again do you have a cite to prove that Beauchamp lied ?
capelza
brock, yes it did..to Beauchamp and his girl.
brock o. baum
Whatever happens, I hope he is not the target of a focussed smear campaign. I am getting more than a little tired of those.
…Dear, Lord..I really cannot believe you wrote this…you, after all, were the one leading it on your own blog, for Chrissakes..
..shame on you…seriously…shame..
The Other Andrew
Brock–why would TNR make up a minor story about troops misbehaving, when they could just focus on one of the major stories about troops misbehaving? Do you think they were fooled, or do you think this is a grand MSM conspiracy?
cleek
wait, let me re-phrase that:
do you have a cite to back up your claim (from the other thread) that “Beauchamps admitted to lying” ? (those are your words)
i’m not interested in your opinions or your logic games, only whether or not you can back up this claim.
The Kenosha Kid
Why was the “investigation” conducted by the Public Affairs Office, and not CID?
John Cole
Well, we honestly don’t know what happened with the investigation, but if it turns out CID was not involved and I had to guess, it is because CID is busy with, ya know, real investigations.
brock o. baum
The Other Andrew Says:
Brock—why would TNR make up a minor story about troops misbehaving, when they could just focus on one of the major stories about troops misbehaving? Do you think they were fooled, or do you think this is a grand MSM conspiracy?
tBone
brock apparently thinks that the judicious application of ellipses will magically turn his Bizarro World claims into reality.
capelza
From Sadly No! comments, “a different brad”.
brock o. baum
The Other Andrew Says:
Brock—why would TNR make up a minor story about troops misbehaving, when they could just focus on one of the major stories about troops misbehaving? Do you think they were fooled, or do you think this is a grand MSM conspiracy?
..they wanted to advance it as a scoop..
..as for instances where troops are caught “misbehaving…they should be punished to the fullest extent possible..
…in instances wher individual or the MSM are caught in blatant lies, they too need to be held accountable..
..the MSM obviously has an anti-military bias…to try to claim otherwise is simply silly…
brock o. baum
Remember, the best way to find out if someone committed an illegal act is to ask them.
..well the sarcasm is obvious…but what of mysterious, unnamed corroborators…if they existed, that could really cause a problem..if they didn’t…oh, well…you get the idea..
capelza
Oh, oh…so when I asked the herd of teenagers in the boycave downstairs if they were drinking and no one fessed up, even though one of them previously had told me they had, I must assume that the charge was a LIE, because I could not get anyone to bust themselves.
THAT’S what the military is doing. It’s a lie, because no one would admit they did it.
RSA
On troll disclaimers:
Try running with this:
How dare John give kudos to someone who makes a conditional statement about American soldiers being liars!
Perry Como
…if…I’m…ever….questioned….by…..the…..police……I
……..hope……..they……..take………me……….at
………..my………word………..that……..I………..didn’t
………….do………..it…………………
tBone
Exactly. The MSM obviously has an anti-teen bias…to try to claim otherwise is simply silly…
It’s been fun to watch brock and his compatriots pore over the Beauchamp/TNR claims like they were doing a frame-by-frame analysis of the Zapruder film, and then turn on a dime and become a gaggle of credulous children as soon as the Army makes an official statement. It’s now a Known Fact that Beauchamp was lying all along!!
Perry Como
Back. And to THE LEFT!
Back. And to THE LEFT!
Back. And to THE LEFT!
Back. And to THE LEFT!
brock o. baum
One hundred percent of soldiers, when asked, state that no, they do not want an Article 15:
..so instead of smearing them one at a time, Cole went for economy and did it en masse here..
capelza
Darrell is that you?
Darkwater
One hundred percent of soldiers, when asked, state that no, they do not want an Article 15:
And some of this stuff wouldn’t necessarily rise to the level of an Article 15. Running over a dog? LOC/LOR, maybe, now that’s it’s gone national. Making fun of a disfigured woman? C’mon.
cleek
OK, good. i think i have my answer: when brock said “Beauchamps admitted to lying”, in the previous thread, brock himself was, in fact, lying.
veracity established.
marc page
Haven’t you forgotten thte New Rules of Evidence ? Shouldn’t you ask ‘brock’ if he “was, in fact, lying?”
cleek: brock, were you lying?
brock: Absolutely not, cleek; I was telling the truth.
cleek: Alright then; just thought I’d ask.
Perry Como
If it’s good enough for the Attorney General, it’s good enough for me.
David
tBone Says:
Not only that, we also now know… according to brock and compatriots…
That’s right! We’re back to Square One. Beauchamp didn’t/doesn’t exist… and neither did/do his friends. Life is wonderful in LaLa Land.
not the senator
Why are Army Public Affairs Officers even responding to the likes of Confederate Yankee? Anybody who would proudly align themselves with confederate traitors who killed hundreds of thousands of loyal Americans is an idiot who should be ignored.
The Other Steve
I believe this is all military lingo for:
Major: “Captain, I want you to make sure this didn’t happen.”
Captain: “You mean bury it, sir?”
Major: “I don’t want to see any more about this.”
The Other Steve
And honestly, I don’t blame them. This was pretty stupid, and I feel sorry for the military having to put up with all this whining from the 101st chairborne.
capelza
So is there a link to an actual Army statement on the record that is not filtered through Confedrate Yankee or some other blog?
An e-mail to some guy does not have the gravitas of an offical pronouncemnet.
They did a week long investigation? Either military justice has suddenly and inexplicably gotten much faster, or some PAO went around asking guys, who were busy elsewhere I assume, no longer deployes possibly, and lord knows what else..did you run over a dog?
John Cole
No, but does it really matter? If you demonstrate why the report is meaningless, they will just throw up some other hoop that proves, well, something.
And this is all besides the point- I have never really been very invested in whether he did or did not do these things, I have been focussing on the idiocy of those who have been insisting he didn’t, that it is all a lie designed to smear the troops, and that they can prove it because the Powerline has a scale model of a Bradley.
That is where the real story is- the depths of stupidity in a certain segment of the blogosphere.
capelza
Oh I agree, John. I guess that’s my point. Some blogger dude e-mails people with MUCH better things to do and wants them to drop what they are doing.
So, taking time out from their very busy days, they half-assed do some checking to get the dweeb off their backs.
And said sop to said dweeb is then circulated as motherfucking gospel. Besides the fact that said dweeb could be making all this up in the first place, but I won’t go there. I’ll take him at his word, because that is all we have, that he did indeed bother harassed PAOs with this ridiculous shit.
It is stupid, so stupid.
Bruce Moomaw
Now I look forward to the RWB probing with equal intensity into the claims of Cpl. Lopezromo in the Haditha trial.
(Sound of crickets chirping)
Really, why do we waste our time with these hysterical nitwits? Dr. Johnson warned us about that sort of thing two centuries ago.
mike montague
“That is where the real story is- the depths of stupidity in a certain segment of the blogosphere.”
No, the real story is that you guys actually WANT this story to be true.
John Cole
Translation- “Hi, my name is Mike Montague and I haven’t understood a fucking thing that has been written on this blog regarding Beauchamp. Everyone point and make fun of me.”
JWeidner
*points at mike montague*
Ha Ha you stupid fucker!
capelza
No mike montague, you miss it completely.
As has been said a gajillion times on this very blog.
Why would we WANT this to be true? The fact that the things stated in it could happen, and much worse things has (you know, rape, murder, etc and soldiers have been convicted of said crimes). Some young idiots doing stupid stuff in a war zone is not on the radar for most sane people. That fact that it is on anyone’s radar is because some incredibly stupid people felt the need to create this huge drama.
You do look really stupid when you expend so energy trying to deny this, yet the American public hears about the rape and murder convictions, etc. It’s the “train wreck” thing that has most of us interested in the Beauchamp “affair”.
Do I want it to be true? No, I’d like to think that American soldiers behave like choirboys the entire time they are in a war zone. But being human, some react with less than saintly behaviour.
My husband shot some poor farmer’s water buffalo in Vietnam, from his helicopter. Because he was scared, bored and a stupid 18/19 y/o boy. It fucking happens. He was certainly not alone in that kind of thing either. Is he proud of it? No. But it happened.
If “we” wanted to “slam the troops” it would be so much easier to continuously link to the you-tube vids that actually show American soldiers doing things pretty much like Beauchamp described. I can guarantee that many, many more people watch youtube than read TNR (well until the unhinged right kindly brought it to our attention). Why not go after those soldiers?
Instead, there’s THIS utterly entertaining hoopla of the past week or two. Entertaining for me, anyway, though not for Beauchamp and his loved ones, when certain bloggers of the unhinged right felt compelled to post, for example, the wedding registry of the couple, parsing it out and actually expressing doubts that it was real. Now, that’s just creepy. Though I hope that someone bought them a toaster!
Jim Treacher
Why did anybody care that Stephen Glass made up a software company?
capelza
Jim Teacher, why do you waste your time posting something rather contradictory to prove a point? Glass was outed, his stories vetted and he was fired. I had to google that, never read the rag after Sullivan took over anyway.
So they vetted Beauchamp and stood by him.
One is not like the other.
But then we “hate” the troops, right?
Jim Treacher
He asked why anybody cared. I asked why anybody cared the last time this happened to TNR. I certainly didn’t mean to upset you.
John Cole
I suspect Glass would never have been outted had he stuck to believable things, like WMD stockpiles in Iraq, ship-launched gliders laden with chemical weapons, or the news that important Iranians were dead.
/sarcasm
John Cole
Upsetting people is ok, Jim. It is our new editorial position here.
srv
I honestly can’t tell the difference between these wingnuts and the 9/11 truthers. If the Fluffersphere has shown anything, it is just how mentally deranged a large segment of our population is.
Jim Treacher
Fair warning! ;)
Hey, I can’t seem to find the name of that disfigured woman anywhere. The one Foer confirmed. You know, the one in Iraq. I mean Kuwait! She was a soldier, or maybe a contractor, or possibly a mirage. What was her name?
marc page
When TNR offers unnamed individuals to corroborate Mr. Beauchamp’s account, the Wingnuts howl for Name, Rank, and Serial Number. When the military proffers nameless soldiers who do not corroborate Mr. Beauchamp, there is no problem.
And it seems to me the reason for this apparent contradiction is obvious: as they have done before, they can only properly attack (through family members, employers, etc.) by having enough identifying information on their targets.
The pioneers of this approach — Malkin, Goldstein, Patterico — like nothing more than sweeping aside the issue and getting straight to the heart of the matter: hitting someone financially and personally.
Jim Treacher
So you don’t know her name, then?
John Redworth
John,
I understood what you were trying to say as far as the reactions by some on the right to this story… however, in the run to show true patriotism, you got caught in the “he must want the terrorists to win” wind storm brought on by the strongly willed keyboarding patriots…
I felt the same way you did that the over-reaction to the story and the smears were well over the top… at no time did I want the story to be true but at the same time I would have loved to have seen some retraction by the knee-jerk monkeys… I know that wouldn’t have happened, it is much easier to just delete the entry or pile on other stories so their original smears are buried…
BTW- Brock, are you going to cite your evidence where this Beauchamp dude admitted to lying or are we supposed to take your word on it?
John Cole
Note to assholes-
Next time you make fun of someone, get their name first so Jim believes you made fun of them.
Otherwise, he is gonna get the Confederate Yankee emailing your boss.
Not to mention- I have no clue if Beauchamp’s stories ARE in fact true. Just like the knuckledraggers have no way of proving them to be false.
Jim Treacher
Who said I didn’t believe he made fun of her? I’m just curious what her name is. Since she’s confirmed and all.
John Cole
I guess you are talking to someone else then, because I have never alleged he confirmed her. To my knowledge, the best the TNR can do on that front is to state they have talked to other soldiers who confirm Beauchamp’s story. Beyond that, you got me.
But that just drags us into debating whether or not these events happened as described, when the winger position is that they absolutely could not have happened and this is nothing but a ploy by the pro-war TNR to smear the troops.
marc page
Right. Maybe you’ll send her a Christmas card, or something.
[Irrelevant note: ending sentences with the phrase “and all” really has to stop.
Sometimes I wish Salinger had trademarked the damned thing.]
Jim Treacher
I’m not sure what a “winger” is, but the Christmas card idea is a good one! Sounds like the poor gal could use some cheering up.
Jim Treacher
And all! :)
HairlessMonkeyDK
“I hate the troops and OBL is my hero! 911 was a conspiracy! Universal healthcare is the first part of our communist takeover!”.
This is how whining wingnuts parse ze language of ze moonbat.
Oppose the administration’s idea of the Unitary Exec?
“OMG! You want the terrorists to win!”.
Want to curtail the governments ability to monitor you?
“Well, if you got nothing to hide what’s the problem! (Spoken in retard-voice)”.
Want to ensure that the troops get more r’n’r?
“Why do you hate the military!”.
Sanity, it seems, is going out of style.
jake
OT: The Book done been throwed.
Although I don’t understand how a crime that merits a 110 year sentence leaves one eligible for parole in 10.
SDN
Of course, what Johnny “of course they can’t corroborate it” Cole overlooks is that by his logic, TNR CAN’T EITHER!!!!!!!!
Which pretty much leaves us where we have always been: those with a predisposition to hate and slander the troops will believe any wild story; those without it…. won’t.
Beej
SDN
Please take a reading comprehension course before attempting to comment on this blog. You see, on this particular blog, the proprietors actually put a little bit of thought into their posts rather than simply repeating the wingnut mantra (hate the troops, hate the troops, hate the troops). This means that you actually have to understand i.e. comprehend what you read. You, quite obviously have not comprehended a single word.
Oh, and just to clarify, did you know that John Cole served in the military and was an NCO? Isn’t it amazing how someone with that background can “hate the troops”?
And by the way, SDN, are you currently serving in the military or have you already done your service? Or are you simply a member of the 101st Keyboarders?
John Redworth
SDN does bring up somewhat a good point in that there are those who will believe any wild story or those that will deny it no matter what… yet, it still does not address the idea that over reaching attacks and smears by some went well beyond agreeing or disagreeing with the accounts provided… it is one thing to say “Yeah, I don’t trust that story” but it is entirely different to bring out the personal attacks and smears because you don’t want to believe the story…
Maybe it is much easier to tar and feather the messenger than it is to question the message in blogland…
Matthew
It is hard to prove something never happened.
Phil
You know, Treacher, I read about guys going on trial for rape nearly all the time in the newspaper, and yet never once — or in any case in a vanishingly small percentage of stories — do I hear the names of their alleged “rape victims.” I therefore have to assume that these rape victims do not exist and these incidents never happened.
Right?
brock o. baum
Well, well, well…..Bob Owens has confirmed with Maj. Renee Russo, PAO Iraq, that Jason Zenegerle, Senior Editor of TNR actually had contacted her prior to the publishing of the article where Foer said the “woman was confirmed”.
Russo told her the same thing that she told Owens; that the melty-face woman is a myth.
Yet they published the lie…and the leftards ate it up…
…this is a scenario that repeats itself over and over..
…when smart people call it into question…they are attacked…
..this really is the state of the “news” industry today..
…thank God for blogs, or else the truth would never get out…
…but…but…but…Sanchez did gay stuff
Jim Treacher
Wait, she got raped? I thought Beauchamp just cruelly mocked her facial scars. Well anyway, I was just asking if anybody knew her name. No biggie!
Jim Treacher
Also… in a rape case, isn’t it usually the victim who makes the charge? According to the Army, she never did. They don’t seem to think she even exists. (Coverup!!!) Apparently the first they heard of the whole thing was when Beauchamp published his article. Other than that, I see what you’re saying, Phil.
capelza
So is Bob Owens the new go to guy for Iraq? If I want a question answered I’ll have him act as the go between?
Everything I’ve seen all comes from him and Matt Sanchez. Seriously this is ridiculous. I want a real POA coming on TV or at least releasing a PUBLIC statement about it. But of course, who needs verification? Bob Owens has spoken!
I’ve looked online, can someone direct me, or should I start e-mailing Bob Owens, intrepid reporter, for the real skinny? I can forget all about reading or watching the news, Bob Owens has it all covered. He’s the man!
Oh by the way, one of the best things about Wikipedia is the discussion page on the article. The one on Matt Sanchez is a hoot. It’s weird to have the subject of the article so involved (and editing his own page, though it is now locked), but you do learn a lot about the guy from that page.
Jim Treacher
Maybe Owens would pass along the contact information for the people he’s been talking to, if you asked him nicely.
LittlePig
Hey, brock, how many times have you gone to the police station to report that you were speeding?
capelza
I don’t want the “contact information”. I want a public release of the “findings”. Seems if the army was so concerned that they spent nearly a week investigating this, pronto, they were concerned enough about it to dispel the negative story publically, just not into the ear of Bob Owens.
Jim Treacher
Well, he asked. Light a candle or curse the darkness…
capelza
I am sure he asked. But again, if the army felt the need for such a thorough investigation of *nearly* a week, you’d think they’d want the postive press. Don’t you?
Cause outside of wingnuttia, Bob Owens, is not exactly a household name, to be kind. :)
Jim Treacher
Heck, I didn’t even know his name until Cole mentioned it. It was always just “Confederate Yankee” to me. I don’t remember saying he was famous, just that he asked the Army about TNR’s statement. If you think he’s making up their answer, you could try asking them yourself. (Or not; I’m not trying to tell you what to do.)
capelza
Oh I didn’t either Jim Teacher, till brock kept using him as the authoritative final answer.
He might very well have talked to them, in fact I am sure he did, because they have nothing better to do than chat with some dude freaking out about young men making fun of someone who looks different (thank god she didn’t have a muffin top!) or ran over a dog.
It is the idiocy. Any honest soldier that has been in a war zone will tell you that stupid shit happens. That Bob Owens and nitwits like Ace, etc. felt that THIS was the defining moment of “liebral” media getting caught with their pants down is the story.
That suddenly after a decade of NOT being a liberal rag, suddenly the pro-war TNR is now the most liberal of liberal press, why they are so liberal that Democratic Underground looks positively right-wing compared to them, they are THAT liberal. So dumb.
That, for the billionth time, all the vapors and indignant collapsping on the fainting couch over this story have been the very avenue for the rest of the country to hear about it. No one would have heard of it, read it or given a damn, if Bob Owens and his pals hadn’t made such a big stinking deal out of it.
And the “we support the troops and you lefties don’t cuz, cuz, you believe this guy”..is again too dumb on so many levels. But it’s been fun, meanwhile, because soldiers NEVER do anything untoward in battle, those soldiers convicted in the rape, burning the body and murdering her whole family of a 14 y/o girl…the same wingnuts ain’t touching that one. Her name was Abeer Qassim Hamza, btw.
So it does happen, and yet Bob Owens, etc. is freaking out about someone who says a dog got run over.
Do you not see why people are laughing at Bob Owens, etc.?
Jim Treacher
Like I said, I wasn’t trying to tell you what to do. Just a suggestion. You can laugh at whoever you want to laugh at, of course.
capelza
So you are suggesting that anyone that wants verification of Bob Owens’ “official” report contact the PAO? That say hundreds, heck thousands now that it is all over the blogosphere, of people e-mail them demanding the answers? Brilliant plan! Let’s ALL harass the PAO over this.
Like I said, I don’t see an official press release as unreasonable, for their sake if nothing else. And if there is one, I’d be happy to see it. Honestly.
Jim Treacher
So you want an official statement, as long as it hasn’t been made to somebody you don’t like. Understood.
capelza
No, I want an official statement.
I’d say the same thing if it was Cole, Kos, or the Belgravia Dispatch. Official verification is a good thing. And you, if you are honest, would say the exact same thing if one of the above was using their personal discussions with some PAO as “official” /end discussion type of thing.
Wouldn’t you? If you would would happily settle for *their* second hand verifications then I bow to you. And I will hold you to it. :)
John S.
Who the hell is Bob Owens?
Jim Treacher
I’d hope so! Well, whatever it is you just said, ditto.
brock o. baum
capelza Says:
I don’t want the “contact information”. I want a public release of the “findings”. Seems if the army was so concerned that they spent nearly a week investigating this, pronto, they were concerned enough about it to dispel the negative story publically, just not into the ear of Bob Owens.
Col. Steven Boylan, PAO for US Army Commanding genearl in Iraq David Patreus has already issues the fings…the statement is that all allegations are false..it’s all lies…it never happened..it was all made up..there is no truth to it..
…Bob Owens has gone on record saying he spoke with Maj. Russo who told him that she had told Jason Zengerle of TNR that the melty-face woman was a myth..
…if you refuse to accept his word, why don’t you have John Cole use his blooger “credentials” to find out if this is true or not..
..see it’s OK to do that…she’s the PAO…her job is to respond to these types of inquiries..
..you really are making yourself out to look like a fool..
brock o. baum
capelza Says:
So you are suggesting that anyone that wants verification of Bob Owens’ “official” report contact the PAO?
…yep…it’s her job…
Jim Treacher
Well, just because it’s her job doesn’t mean she should be asked to do it. Capelza wants the truth, as long as it doesn’t inconvenience anybody. Why, if she got hundreds, heck thousands of e-mails, she might respond by putting out a press release or something.
ida slapter
LittlePig Says:
Hey, brock, how many times have you gone to the police station to report that you were speeding?
…never have…why do you ask?..
cleek
ladies and gentleman, we have a celebrity in our midst: ida slapter (nee. brock o. baum) is a celebrated female impersonator!
David
So now… let me get this straight. As I understand it, if I am to believe the Fluffernutters… Beauchamp doesn’t exist, his five friends don’t exist, AND NOW the disfigured woman doesn’t exist. Does that about sum up the whackery?
Hey, could someone tell me if Iraq definitively exists, or is that also a figment of everyone’s imagination? What about dogs… do they exist? Are there really Bradleys out there, or is that some grand Military Industrial Complex conspiracy akin to that supposed Moon Landing?
John Cole
The Confederate Yankee is one email away from proving I don’t exist.
The latest “scandal” is more of the same, if you check his website. In between the publishing of the story and Foer’s statement affirming corroboration, the TNR editors spoke to the PAO, who could not verify the insulted woman. According to the Cy, this means the TNR KNEW SHE DID NOT EXIST BUT SAID SHE DID ANYWAY.
For the rest of the planet, it means that TNR learned that Beauchamp had erred between Iraq and Kuwait as to the location, and then reconfirmed his version of events with his buddies, albeit in Kuwait, and issued the confirmation, ignoring the PAO’s assertion that they could find no one like that in Iraq (which would make sense, since Beauchamp and his buddies now say it happened in Kuwait).
But on the CY- IT IS PROOF OF THE LIBERAL MEDIA SMEARING OUR TROOPS.
Jim Treacher
Jim Treacher
Heh, the 2nd paragraph is mine. The wingers stole my closing tag!
John Cole
I blame Arabs. Or Mexicans.
Someone call Malkin.
Jim Treacher
I thought Russo was stationed in Kuwait? Didn’t Owens ask her if it happened there and she said no?
John Cole
Jim, you may be right, but see step #2 here.
marc page
This is silly. No reasonable person could believe that Bob Owens (a/k/a Confederate Yankee, a/k/a Gun Counter Gomer) could possibly exist.
However, if the United States military says that no member of the armed services has done anything that would bring discredit on his superior officers, that should be good enough for any “well-trained, square-jawed American.”
Semper Fi, Charlie Mike, goo goo ga joob.
Jim Treacher
Well, let’s not go overboard.
Does Major Renee D. Russo, Third Army/USARCENT PAO at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait exist? I’m guessing not. Come on, Renee Russo??
marc page
And if she doesn’t, I would hardly be surprised.
Jim Treacher
Yeah, it would just be like these wingerfluffernuts to make up some fictional “Army spokeswoman” to back up their baseless claims about TNR’s anonymous witnesses.
marc page
Watch out for that tendency to binary thinking, Jimbo. If you try I’m sure you could think of a few other ways of looking at that. (Or, possibly, not.)
Jim Treacher
Oh, definitely. There are all kinds of ways of looking at that.
capelza
As we have already gone over this ad nauseuem I’d just like to issue a heart felt fuck you for making me not want to use my beloved ellipses ever again.
Dave in Texas
What if Beauchamp admits it was all made up bullshit?
John Cole
Umm. Then it was all made up, which I said was quite possible. My position all along is that everything he said could be true, everything he said could be false, or more than likely, it could be bits of truth embellished to the point of falsehood.
None of those options warranted the hysterical over-reaction.
Dave in Texas
Hysterical over-reaction?
Really?
Like claiming everyone in his company would avoid Article 15 proceedings? What’s the point of that statement, exactly?