Powered by TypePad

« Mr. Sulzberger, Tear Down This Wall | Main | Back From Iraq »

August 07, 2007



What I find the most fascinating is,why did Beauchamp enlist in the first place? It isn't as if his wife would have given him a white feather for declining to do his bit for Bushitler.


PUK - Maybe he thought he was Kerry-lite?

Les Nessman

"Seemingly, if Foer is as big a d--k as he
seems, couldn't he just lay all the blame at her feet? And say "Hey I was had! These two lying swindlers are to blame!" Wouldn't that basically exhonerate TNR, Foer et al, and ruin the lives of two lying liars? "

Why bother? What exactly does Foer have to worry about? Nothing is going to happen to him, and if by some miracle it does, he'll just move on to some other Lefty media who will welcome him with open arms.


"Maybe he thought he was Kerry-lite?"

Sounds like some low fat Irish butter.


I'll also add that the decision to use the phrase "proven false" is a level of certainty the Army would not use unless Beauchamp had recanted. Otherwise they would have used wording such as 'not supported by the evidence.'

As to why Beauchamp joined the Army, I would guess he did it for the same reasons a lot of guys who don't finish a BA do. He either ran out of money or didn't have sufficient focus to graduate. A lot of guys like that end up in the Army. It is actually a very clarifying experience for most of them.

Rick Ballard


I've been bifurcating "past" and "present" with the firing of Rummy. Gates, Fallon and Petraeus have redefined the battlespace and there is no reason to assume that a skilled rebuttal of clumsy agitprop is beyond the capabilities of our very competent psyops people. This one looks like pretty effective counterbattery fire to me and the involvement of Petraeus' PAO seems a rather large clue.

What have you seen that would make you believe that it is a clumsy or ill-timed effort? Or, better yet, lets wait one more week prior to reviewing the after action report. If TNR winds up with two empty offices (Zengerle and Foer) then I'd say that target assessment and retaliatory fire were very accurate.


It was probably easy for TNR to find confirmation about the skull cap story since it first appeared in a German newspaper about German troops in Afghanistan. So, many could probably say, "yeah, I heard about that too." The question not asked by TNR is what the "that" actually was. As to the burned woman, where is she? Why has she not come forward? Why has no one else seen her either in Iraq, as first reported, or in Kuwait, as the story stands now. And why is there no record of her? She was supposedly injured in an IED attack. Would she not have been Medevaced (sp?) to Germany if she sustained such a bad injury? Where are the records? And if the injury happened a few years ago and she recovered and asked to return to the war zone, wouldn't there be someone somewhere who remembers clearing her paperwork or working with her. It seems a story like that would be a real human interest story with a headline: "Badly burned woman puts aside her pain and disfigurement to return to the mission!"

And a look at Beauchamp's web pages prior to his enlistment makes one wonder about his sexual orientation, a fact that I'm sure has not escaped the Army investigation. He all but comes out and says he is gay, the fact of marriage not withstanding. Pictures of him being kissed by other guys, etc. How could the Army ignore the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy with such blatant in your face evidence?

And for those who are so willing to call the Army animals on every level and want to believe Beauchamp/TNR over the military, I would ask - Are you seriously willing to take the word of a busted private, already busted for some infraction down from Private First Class to Private over a Colonel, a Lt. Colonel, 3 Majors, and a First Sargent? Do you seriously think these officers and NCO would lie and risk there entire careers for some screw up private? I don't think so!

Do these guys look like they want a screw up like Beauchamp watching their backs?



"He either ran out of money or didn't have sufficient focus to graduate. A lot of guys like that end up in the Army."

"Elspeth My Dear,I am called to the colours and am off to become a trained baby killer for the Republican Bushitler,Elspeth what are you doing with that "Freedom of Choice" banner,be careful the pole is rather sharp,Eeeelllllspeeeth!!!!!"



On the other hand lying to or deceiving military investigators is a *very* serious offense and isn't one that anybody in their right minds would risk.

Well, only if it involved a material matter, and only then if the activities being concealed constituted an actual rather than potential crime.

Given Mr. Beauchamp's record of public service at wage rates lower than what he might be able to command in the private sector, it's entirely possible that his commander in chief would let him off without imprisonment even were he to be convicted.

*With tongue firmly in cheek. I've not served**, so I've little to add to the discussion.

**I was rejected when I attempted to enlist (many moons ago) because of a depressed skull fracture*** sustained in a cliff-diving adventure.

***Say what? Technical name for a hole in my head. Fortunately, it hasn't affected my ability to work as a lawyer.


The saddest thing is that, while the world is yearning for more Perry Whites and Jimmy Olsens, no one is yearning to be a Perry White or a Jimmy Olsen.

Rick Ballard

Re redefinition of battlespace - this piece points up what I'm talking about.

I really enjoy seeing the DoD telling the DoS to shove it. It's truly heartwarming.


Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity in the news again?

WaPo Article (scroll down):

"I have it on very, very good authority that major opposition research has already been conducted on [a candidate's family], and it's going to be a massive smear campaign against him," he says. A group of former intelligence officers, he says, is "going to try to cripple [the candidate] through [attacking the family member]."



Nope. There must be another group, as the candidate is Hillary! and the family member is Bill himself.


as the candidate is Hillary! and the family member is Bill himself.

This is unwise.

PLEASE don't let your friends do this sh*t. it will only garner sympathy for Hil and get her more votes.

I beg you! I'm so p*ssed at Hannity for his Hillary diaries thing. This is all going to backfire bigtime.

She's expecting it and dare I say looking forward to it! Don't fall into that trap!


...backfire big time.

So it is VIPS after all!


Soros funds the VIPs I believe and is backing Obama. Makes sense.

Rick Ballard


Former President Bill Clinton Caught in Extramarital Tryst!!!

I dunno - it seems to me that you'd havta add a few midgets and a bearded lady to draw a crowd.

ION - Water Found to be Wet!!!

hit and run

OT, you wanna see into the crazy, on the edge of being out of control, yet altogether compelling life as it might be portrayed in the hit and run household?

At bedtime?

Set to the tune of Pachelbel's Canon

Seriously, it's 4 minutes long, but you'll, laugh, you'll cry, you'll kiss your cynicism goodbye.



Please consider

Central Command Blogger Team

Stolen Valor Act

Current Malkin where she asks: Think it doesn’t make a difference? Imagine where Sen. John Kerry would be now if the Internet had been around in 1971.

The author of Stolen Valor orginally called it "The Fake Vet Syndrome". Every faker is taking away from real veterans-in time, dollars, and space.


Just tell us that's not you H&r.

And while you are at it, tell me when the next debate is scheduled.

hit and run

No, not me. But it accurately expresses what is about to occur in t-minus 17 minutes...

Gay debate tomorrow night!

But it's on "gay network LOGO", not sure if I get that channel...though appears to be streamed online too.

hit and run


"Every Democratic candidate except Joe Biden and Chris Dodd plans to participate."


"The Democrats will appear sequentially at 15-minute intervals during the two-hour forum, never sharing the stage with one another."


WOW! I hope I can find it. Now I have to remember.

Interesting that the candidates will be politely questioned individually. My guess is the HRC is a big Obama fan.


Oh good. It's channel 650 on my TV! Now playing "The Elton John Story".


Dems' wide ranging debates

One focus group at a time.


Besides Hillary has already had two appearances in front of the same group already in this election cycle.


Can anyone provide me links showing the statistics of overseas voter registrations in the last few US Presidential Elections, e.g., 1. number of overseas voters,
2. of the total number of overseas voters, how many are military,
3. How many of them are registered Democrats and how many of them are registered Republicans?


hit and run

Interesting that the candidates will be politely questioned individually.

Can't call it a debate if only one candidate is on the stage at a time.

More like the Miss America "Onstage Question". During Miss America, the onstage question is given during the evening gown competition.

[VIMH: That's a surprising amount of knowledge of Miss America pageants]
Wikipedia. And Powerline.

[VIMH: Disappointed you didn't make an Edwards in evening gown joke]
Oh, it's no joke. I hear his backless number is...hey you tricked me.



Can anyone provide me links showing the statistics of overseas voter registrations in the last few US Presidential Elections, e.g., 1. number of overseas voters, 2. of the total number of overseas voters, how many are military, 3. How many of them are registered Democrats and how many of them are registered Republicans?

1. This paper discusses in brief Overseas voters The Myth of the Vanishing Voter; however it does not give a country break down, or military, other gov't, or civilian breakdown. Good sources however

2. Census data here

Here is an LA Times editorial from Jan2007 that discusses party affiliation of the military [it comes from the left and is reporting a Military Times poll]

Another source for information might be Democrats Abroad and Republicans Abroad and what numbers they my have for active duty personnel

Good luck, the catalouges are a bit thin on voting patterns, party affiliation and the US military

[IIRC, the military usually votes at about a 70% clip, with it becoming more conservative up until you hit the flag officer corp...there are about 250,000 US soliders stationed nationally this would maybe break out to about 175,000 voters; breaking 60%-40% Republican.]



Another link

This address the officer corp only. And one more thought-NCOA [Non-Commissioned Officers Association], might be able to provide you with data.

Hope it helps

hit and run

More from confederate yankee

TNR put out a defense of the Diarists and their legendary fact checking that said:

The last section of the Diarist described soldiers using Bradley Fighting Vehicles to kill dogs. ... TNR contacted the manufacturer of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle System, where a spokesman confirmed that the vehicle is as maneuverable as Beauchamp described. Instructors who train soldiers to drive Bradleys told us the same thing.

So, what did Bob at CY do? Call BAE, the manufacturer, and got a hold of the person TNR spoke to.

And did TNR's story of fact-checking the plausibility of Beauchamp's claim check out?

Silly question.

Bob concludes:

In other words, BAE System's Head of Communications over the division than manufactures the Bradley IFV was never specifically asked to comment on the claims made in "Shock Troops" by TNR's legion of fact-checkers.

When he saw the claims made in "Shock Troops," he stated, by citing the physical properties of his company's vehicle, that it is highly unlikely, if not impossible, for the Bradley story told in "Shock Troops" to have been correct.

But go read the whole thing to hear the BAE dude tell the story...

hit and run

Oh, he reads my emails. But I don't even get so much as a "from a reader", let alone a "longtime reader" or "devoted reader" or "respected reader" or "Bestest friend" or something.

Ballad of Bedtime [Jonah Goldberg]

This is a very sweet little video, likely to be appreciated by many a parent.

08/09 01:56 PM

hit and run

Oh and you can bet your sweet molasses I Question The Timing on this.

I don't question that I was 1 out of hundreds or thousands or gazillions of people to email him questioning about a What's Your Problem? episode where he and TNR'er Beinart discuss Beauchamp.

But he only answers the question 1 minute before posting the link to the video he got from me, his best friend.



What's Your Problem Hassles [Jonah Goldberg]

FYI, What's Your Problem has not been canceled. We had one week off because of technical problems while I was on the cruise. And on Monday, Beinart and I recorded an episode but after three days of trying, it seems the video was unsalvagable and we're going to need to re-record. We did discuss the Beauchamp matter and we'll probably do so again as that seems to be the all-time most requested topic and the first recording of it is lost to history.

08/09 01:55 PM


So where is Texas Toast and the brief swarm that followed two days ago? I just want to get a laugh by hearing the latest rationalization to the latest scoop on the meticulous fact checking Franky. Link above to Confederate Yankee is worth the brief trip.

If TNR has ANY subscribers after this, they must be die hard fiction fans.

You know, you can put lipstick and perfume on a pig, but its still a pig.


Fact Checking Franklin Foer. Almost a toungue twister. A certainly at this point an oxymoron.


Fact Checking Franklin Foer. Almost a toungue twister. A certainly at this point an oxymoron.


These are all--what--journalism grads. They haven't a chance against lawyers and military and engineers, etc. Did in Rather and has done in TNR.
Game's up.


Clarice: a journo (rhymes with porno) grad is an art history major who couldnt hack graduate school in art history. (apologies to art history majors)


If I weren't so distracted by the excellence of Roger Kimball's prose, art history might be approachable.

And You Were There

Wow. Stuck between the propaganda curtains of the Cold War just a bit, are we? If one case is faked, what it purports to represent is discredited? And you guys are slinging around terms like “gullible”?! Two observations:

1.) My wife, who lived until fairly recently in the one of the old East Bloc countries, a very, very hard experience for her and her family due to their refusal to join the Party, has seen both sides far better than the average armchair pundit-historians. Her assessment of the difference between life here in the Free World and back then in the “totalitarian” East?

“It was awful, really very grim…but at least we knew enough not to believe the propaganda spewing from the airwaves. Here, people tend to simply believe whatever they’re told--especially in those strange history books with the mythologized America never torturing anyone, etc—to the point where it’s quite obvious that the State could be as brutal and repressive overseas as it wanted and no one would either know or care.”

2.) Prove her wrong. Read something off-script for a change.

Let’s start with Sara (August 08, 2007 at 03:06 PM), who is repeating our disinformation about their propaganda with these sort of remarks:

“The European leftists, like any totalitarians, needed a tangible enemy”

And we don’t? We, the ones who invented the Cold War, using fake Soviet troop strength estimates supplied by Nazi intelligence agents (whom we spared the inconvenience of Nuremberg for this purpose) to justify the buildup of the military-industrial-surveillance complex? The ones who set up all the little National Security States in Latin America, training 500,000 police & military personnel in the arts of terror, supplying them with all the weapons they needed, our Free Press complicit in the cover up? (How many articles did the NY Times run on the 20,000 killed in El Salvador or the holocaust that was Gautemala?) There is no comparison between the horrors inflicted by the old Evil Empire and the American Liberators: we won that Cold War the old-fashioned way, by killing more people than they did—far more—and then getting us to believe the opposite. (They had no Orwell, you see.) Here’s some more from Sara and her source:

"During the Vietnam War we spread vitriolic stories around the world, pretending that America's presidents sent Genghis Khan-style barbarian soldiers to Vietnam who raped at random, taped electrical wires to human genitals, cut off limbs, blew up bodies and razed entire villages Those weren't facts. They were our tales, but some seven million Americans ended up being convinced their own president, not communism, was the enemy."

Now go see another view:

Good luck! And remember what Tolstoy said:

"I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their life".

I will thank for my friends bringing me in this world. I am not regret to buy flyff penya .

The comments to this entry are closed.