Is Beauchamp Lying About Everything? I Don’t Know . . . But I Know He’s Dishonest, and I Know He’s a Huge Jerk
Bob Owens has the latest military response on Scott Thomas Beauchamp.
Do I trust the military on this? Not necessarily. But I don’t need to.
Here is everything you need to know about Scott Thomas Beauchamp — that he chose to begin an article for The New Republic in this way:
I saw her nearly every time I went to dinner in the chow hall at my base in Iraq. She wore an unrecognizable tan uniform, so I couldn’t really tell whether she was a soldier or a civilian contractor. The thing that stood out about her, though, wasn’t her strange uniform but the fact that nearly half her face was severely scarred. Or, rather, it had more or less melted, along with all the hair on that side of her head. She was always alone, and I never saw her talk to anyone. Members of my platoon had seen her before but had never really acknowledged her. Then, on one especially crowded day in the chow hall, she sat down next to us.
We were already halfway through our meals when she arrived. After a minute or two of eating in silence, one of my friends stabbed his spoon violently into his pile of mashed potatoes and left it there.
“Man, I can’t eat like this,” he said.
“Like what?” I said. “Chow hall food getting to you?”
“No–with that fucking freak behind us!” he exclaimed, loud enough for not only her to hear us, but everyone at the surrounding tables. I looked over at the woman, and she was intently staring into each forkful of food before it entered her half-melted mouth.
“Are you kidding? I think she’s fucking hot!” I blurted out.
“What?” said my friend, half-smiling.
“Yeah man,” I continued. “I love chicks that have been intimate–with IEDs. It really turns me on–melted skin, missing limbs, plastic noses … .”
“You’re crazy, man!” my friend said, doubling over with laughter. I took it as my cue to continue.
“In fact, I was thinking of getting some girls together and doing a photo shoot. Maybe for a calendar? IED Babes.’ We could have them pose in thongs and bikinis on top of the hoods of their blown-up vehicles.”
My friend was practically falling out of his chair laughing. The disfigured woman slammed her cup down and ran out of the chow hall, her half-finished tray of food nearly falling to the ground.
Beauchamp presented this appalling tale as an example of the way that war can change human beings. But it’s really an example of how he is, at his core, a jerk. The publication has admitted that it actually happened in Kuwait — before he even reached Iraq.
Not only is the guy a huge prick — someone who would mock a disfigured woman — but he’s the type of guy who falsely blames his disgusting behavior on the war.
Why wouldn’t you trust him on everything else??
P.S. There are plenty of honorable soldiers who would never behave this way even after experiencing the horrors of war. Some of them are even good writers!
Why isn’t The New Republic interested in their stories?
You have nailed it exactly. This whole story set off my B.S. detector. It just screams out “FAKE”
This guy needs to spend the rest of his enlistment doing the “is your head out of your A** yet? drill.
Nick Temple (f48568) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:53 amAgreed. Nailed it. If he is telling the truth about everything overall, he’s a criminal asshole, and if not, he’s an asshole who mocks disfigured women and, as you mention, blames it on a war he hasn’t got to yet.
And he isn’t telling the truth about what happened when he got to Iraq. Loser all around. He should do what he can to try and get out of the forces as quickly as possible. I’m sure he has few friends in his unit, and deservedly so.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:08 amThat’s a disgusting story. I hope fellow milbloggers denounce him for defiling the image of servicemen. And TNR should be ashamed.
Great job fact-checking.
Fco (201cb0) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:20 amThe New Republic is as disgraceful as Beauchamp, if not moreso in opting to print and pay for this crap. They manipulatively and earnestly seek to remind us of the awfulness and wrongness of this war and in turn reveal their true political colors.
Why didn’t TNR seek out and choose to show a shining sliver of humanity in the midst of war by printing that one soldier’s story who may have reached out to this woman with a small but mighty ‘hello’ or nod of acknowledgement or any simple greeting of acceptance? What? Not one soldier there has displayed this sort of decency toward an unfortunate woman? Not one anywhere?
Call me a fool but I think more highly of our men in service. And I think that one soldier would not suit their agenda whatsoever. Better to keep his voice silent.
Dana (b4a26c) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:23 amIt didn’t even happen in Kuwait. Beauchamp made it up whole-cloth. The PAO in Kuwait says there hasn’t been anyone like that, it’s an urban legend. Unfortunately, it appears that he’s only going to get administrative punishment instead of a courts-martial. The only reason I can think of that make sense is when the investigator put him under oath (and I’m guessing here), he admitted everything was a lie. If he had stuck to any part of his story and it was later proven false, they could have thrown the book at him.
Even though you can technically be courts-martialed for anything you can also receive administrative (non-judicial) punishment for, past practice applies and you generally receive whatever has been done in the past. Unauthorized blogging and minor OPSEC violations aren’t usually referred to courts-martial. In the Army, this means an Article 15 leading to reduction in rank, loss of some pay, restriction, and extra duty.
Stashiu3 (f9262c) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:27 amFor an example of a fine writer who is currently serving in Iraq, I give unto you The Teflon Don.
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:28 amHow long till TNR “fact checks” the “Kuwait chow hall” story and find out that it took place in Germany….. and then before that in basic training, STB is a scumbag of the lowest order, that even a few years in Ft. Leavenworth. will not fix.
Thomas the disugted (e34151) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:29 amAnd personally, I would have prefered to see STB get tossed into a dark hole at Fort Leavenworth. For what he did, slandering the US Military like that?
*spit*
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:29 amYou can meet all kinds of folks in the Army; I certainly met people that were waaaay outside of my experience when I went through basic training back in 1969. That’s one of the good things about the Army-it brings people from all backgrounds together.
Mr. Beauchamp has an interesting background–you guys might go over to the Ace of Spades blog and read more about him.
He was a politically active type at some Midwest college; he writes and wrote some pretty awful stuff of the sort that might earn a C+ from a charitably minded creative writing professor.
He enlists in the Army maybe to gain material to write the Great American Novel–and also to act as “mole within the corrupt war machine” in his fantasies.
He’s not going to be the Great American Novelist–but he is the Great American Dirt Bag.
If TNR were capable of shame (and it manifestly is not) it would be ashamed of itself for enabling this load of crapola.
Mike Myers (2e43f5) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:42 amBefore shipping out in Sept. 2006, Beauchamp became engaged to a German girl. He was still engaged to her while he was wooing and eventually married, Reeve in May 2007.
sam (57dc2e) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:46 amMeh. I don’t care. Having two bits of pussy on the go is a military tradition in itself.
What I do care about is his lying about his fellow soldiers accusing them of sadistic degrading crimes and for that matter his disgusting berating of a female war veteran (military or brave civilian contractor)’s injuries while this little man hadn’t even got to a war zone yet.
If he’s telling the truth about that and if not, he’s lying once again. A piece of work all around.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:52 amThe guy just gets classier and classier…
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:53 amWhy isn’t The New Republic interested in their stories?
Out of approximately 150,000 servicemen currently serving in Iraq, and out of about 500,000 servicemen who have served in Iraq, The New Republic just happened, by chance, to rely on a solder who would lie in order to undermine America (Think John Kerry). – Just by chance this happened — wink, wink. Really, it was just by chance that this disinformation slipped thru the TNR’s incredible fact checkers. One-in-a-billion chance. Yep.
Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:55 amAs an ex-soldier, there’s one thing I know without any doubt what so ever. That is that a soldier knows his uniform and the uniform of every rank of enlisted person and commissioned officer up and down their chain of command.
If they learn anything in basic training and beyond it’s the attention to detail when it comes to military rank, their uniform, and their chain of command. Nothing is stressed more to a new soldier than his uniform, and his attention to detail, from the top of his head gear to the bottom of his boot soles. He’s also pounded to learn how to recognize the pay grade of fellow soldiers if only to know who to salute and who not to salute, but it’s more than that.
I assure you a soldier will never find another soldiers uniform, enlisted or commissioned, unrecognizable. Period. That statement is just too unbelievable from a soldiers point of view. It would be the equivalent of a lawyer saying, while in a court room, “She wore an unrecognizable black robe, so I couldn’t really tell whether she was a judge or the bailiff.” Seriously, I’m not over stating that comparison.
Let me put it this way. If “she wore an unrecognizable tan uniform” a soldier would never, ever wonder if she was a soldier or a civilian contractor. That soldier wouldn’t have to wonder because it would simply mean that she was not a soldier.
You see, it’s not a soldiers job simply to render someone’s uniform “unrecognizable.” It’s a soldiers duty to be aware of every single service members pay grade. If you fail to do so you can be punished for not saluting an officer.
It only meant one of two things when Beauchamp wrote, “She wore an unrecognizable tan uniform, so I couldn’t really tell whether she was a soldier or a civilian contractor.” Either a) he is a liar and made the woman up out of whole cloth, or 2) he is a liar and made the woman up out of thin air.
That’s my take.
Andy B (caa920) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:03 amSince the theme of Beauchamp’s pieces was to report on how war dehumanizes an individual, the relocation of the chow hall story from Iraq to Kuwait before beauchamp’s actual in-theater deployment means he was suffering from what one wag described as Pre-Traumatic Stress Disorder.
As AF so scurrilously pointed out over the weekend, this is all the fault of that ex-gay porn star Matt Sanchez. The only problem with the theory is that Matt Sanchez has nothing to do with the underlying facts. What will the left think of next? I’m sure it will be something.
daleyrocks (906622) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:12 amThey’ve already admitted that the incident of the woman was not in Iraq, which undermines the theme of war debasing people. Moving the location from Kuwait to Iraq was an intentional lie made to make the story more dramatic.
Such changes for drama is the definition of “fiction” or at least it was when I was learning such things.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:14 amOh noes! Teh Butt Seks!!
I find it amusing that it’s only gay republicans who are absolutely untrustworthy. Had Sanchez been a lib, and defending STB, he’s be a paragon of honesty and virtue…
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:16 amIt has nothing to do with integrity, Scott, just cheap namecalling. Its all that they are interested in today.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:21 amBut STB’s account is perfectly relevant! It’s truthy! Rigoberta Menchu told me so!!
I'm Geekier (12dd25) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:28 amthat’s just plain sick. karmic irony would be to hear his next account in two years after he, too, had been intimate with an ied.
assistant devil's advocate (6f40c3) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:36 amBreaking News – AP reports that Iraqi policeman Jamil Hussein personally witnessed Beauchamp FOB Falcon chow hall incident. Verifies accuracy as reported.
Better late than never I guess.
daleyrocks (906622) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:49 amI’m not sure what you’re getting at, ada, but I don’t like it.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:56 amBecause they’re on the other side.
Patricia (549779) — 8/6/2007 @ 8:56 amAs someone pointed out; the person being ridiculed could just as easily been an
narciso (c36902) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:12 amofficer, a contractor, or an OGA employee; in that case consequences could have been
severe for anyone stupid enough to do so. A fictional example in Brad Thor’s previous
work, Takedown was a former Naval EOD expert; whose skills comes in handy in the
course of the novel. The fact that Beauchamp wrote about such events even before he
deployed to Kuwait; really puts his whole story.
Hmm, stilted dialogue from an aspiring leftist author who openly claims that he needs the legitimacy of the military to give his writing gravitas? What’s not to trust there?
Then again, even if the ‘horrors of war’ had turned him into the slug that said/maybe said/wrote the above exchange, why do we care about his opinion anyway? Are we to trust the assessments of uncaring, snide spotlight grabbers who gladly relay their own bitter commentary?
That isn’t the sort of source I’m interested in diving in after, even if he wasn’t discredited… which for all intents and purposes he has been.
So next MSM propaganda piece, please.
NeoconNews.com (f5a04b) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:15 amI must take exception to Beauchamp being called “a huge prick … “. I have a prick, and it should not be insulted being compared to him. Rectum definitely, another stinky thing you don’t want to hear from. Actually he couldn’t be a pimple on a good soldiers ass.
Gbear
Gbear (6a100c) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:57 amU.S. Army
9/68 – 8/71
He was engaged to her. To most people that means something. Plus, the German fiance is real; the disfigured woman is not.
sam (57dc2e) — 8/6/2007 @ 10:04 amAfter the Army, Mr Beauchump, will probably tell his tall tales at a bar in the VFW or American Legion!
Mike Dee (8324b2) — 8/6/2007 @ 10:06 amMy favorite STB name thus far has to be “Fauxchamp”…
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 8/6/2007 @ 10:13 amI should clarify, Sam.
I’m looking at a photo of my girlfriend who lives in another continent and I’ve been faithful to her for years despite us being separated for most of that time. I love her to tears, want to marry her, and don’t have or want a second woman on the side — despite obvious physical desire.
So as a person, I consider Scott Beauchamp’s cheating wrong, but it’s hardly unheard of in military circles. I’ve also talked to many modern military wives on the internet (in years past) who claim to have open relationships.
Times change. It’s not 1942 anymore.
I don’t approve and didn’t when I’ve heard about such arrangements… I’ve never thought open relationships are a good idea… but that’s what I was told.
So I’m not going to criticize a guy heading to war overmuch for him sleeping with another girl. When in the military, I knew men who did and men who didn’t. Yes, I respected those who didn’t more, but it was their business and I was more concerned with how they did their jobs and if I loaned them money, did they pay me back.
Scott Beauchamp has violated his companions’ trust in incredibly offensive ways. By lying. And accusing them of being psychopaths. And acting like one himself, either tearing down disabled women injured in war when he hadn’t even been in one yet or lying about same.
I’m saying “meh” in this context. It’s not Germain to me.
I’m sure other members of his unit who are good soldiers slept around a bit. I just want to focus on what matters here and it isn’t that.
IMHO
Christoph (92b8f7) — 8/6/2007 @ 10:16 amAt best he’s a jerk, at worst he needs psychiatric help, imprisonment, or both. I’m sure his life at the moment is more uncomfortable than the fabulated victim of his teasing would have been.
One the the best responses I’ve read: Rev. Paul W. McNellis
htom (412a17) — 8/6/2007 @ 10:32 am[…] Patterico’s Pontifications asks a great question: Beauchamp presented this appalling tale as an example of the way that war can change human beings. But it’s really an example of how he is, at his core, a jerk. The publication has admitted that it actually happened in Kuwait — before he even reached Iraq. […]
Hopefully the End to the TNR and Scott Thomas Saga at Conservative Times--Republican GOP news source. (2430bd) — 8/6/2007 @ 10:58 amMy problem with TNR is that if they believed what they were told is true, then they did not properly report a war crime. If they knew it was false, the committed a civil crime. Either way TNR has more than just broken the rules of ethics (which they don’t seem to have published anywhere).
But that is just me… others will most likely see it differently.
ajacksonian (87eccd) — 8/6/2007 @ 11:12 amScott,
And if you said otherwise, you’d be a homophobe.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 11:44 amI see those gifted with moral certitude can accept Pfc. Jesse Spielman, who just got sentenced to 110 years for raping a 14 year old Iraqi girl, then killing her and her family, as, what, a bad apple:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/04/AR2007080401631.html
But you can’t believe our soldiers would run over dogs or chuckle at a disfigured woman?
Scott Thomas Beauchamp is worse than Jesse Spielman to you church lady chickenhawks, isn’t he?
Because he wrote about his moral struggle during your war.
And morals, and the moral good of our noble crusade in Iraq, is never in doubt, is it?
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 11:51 amThose truly bad apples tend to get caught and prosecuted Alphie, as described in the article and in the Abu Ghraib scandal. Somehow, though, prosecution by the military isn’t troofy enough for progressives or atheists like yourself. Matbe it’s becuase they don’t have much skin in the game in an all volunteer military that they feel the need to invent narratives to support their imagined cutout view of the military and war. The Reverend’s piece recommended above addresses that subject well.
daleyrocks (906622) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:01 pmYou keep deliberately missing the point, christoph. I have no idea if Beauchamp slept with his German fiance. I do know that according to her and her family, they became engaged last Sept. While he was writing and calling her, he was also doing the same with Reeve, i.e., telling both women that he loved them and wanted to marry them. I really don’t care that other people have what you term open relationships. Those are not the facts here. He lied to her and jerked her around for 9 months. It more proof of his lack of character. And please don’t tell me about your sex life or lack there of. To that I say, “Meh. I don’t care.”
sam (57dc2e) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:08 pmAt best he’s a jerk, at worst he needs psychiatric help, imprisonment, or both.
Unfortunately, at present there is no known cure for those without a conscience. Stats are that they comprise about 1/20 or 1/25 or so of the general population, and that such folk seek the limelight largely disregarding either the truth or the risk of getting caught, so the odds that Mr. Beauchamp is in that minority are mighty good.
Best description I ever heard on how to spot them is by Martha Stout, who said: watch out for the “pity play.”
First they do something abominable, then they actually seek to make you feel sorry for them over it. If you see that, it’s a close to a scarlet letter as you’re gonna get.
ras (adf382) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:13 pm#35
Scott Thomas Beauchamp is worse than Jesse Spielman to you church lady chickenhawks, isn’t he?
Nobody on this board has made this claim. Jesse Spielman is a convicted murderer, Thomas Beauchamp is a lying, self-serving, cad.
Because he wrote about his moral struggle…
You missed the entire point of this post. Beauchamp did not write about his moral struggle, he just made stuff up to fit the TNR’s agenda.
…your war.
Would that be the war that Hillary Clinton and John Kerry voted for and that the Democrat Congress continues to fund?
Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:13 pmHas there been any follow-up to the report that this liar is engaged to a TNR staffer – who was instrumental in getting his story published?
Storms (882fb7) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:15 pmPerfect Sense,
All admirable points, but please don’t feed the troll. He is merely looking to inflame because … well, that’s all he’s capable of, and he lacks the confidence to learn anything new (the other trolls would tease him if he tried).
So he needs us to help him grow up by our only responding to serious comments. He already knows when he’s serious and when he’s merely inflammatory in that adolescent-angst way of his, now he needs to learn that one is grown-up and the other isn’t.
ras (adf382) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:24 pmI see the point of this post, perfect sense:
The publication has admitted that it actually happened in Kuwait — before he even reached Iraq.
Not only is the guy a huge prick — someone who would mock a disfigured woman — but he’s the type of guy who falsely blames his disgusting behavior on the war.
There’s no way the thought of beginning 12 to 18 months in Iraq in a few days could ever affect someone morally!
Beauchamp should have been joyful about his impending time in the glourious crusade of good against evil!
And if it wasn’t for that pesky bad case of acne/old football injury/desire not to get blown up riding around Baghdad in a mobile IED detector, y’all would jump at the chance yourselves.
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:30 pm“Beauchamp did not write about his moral struggle, he just made stuff up to fit the TNR’s agenda. ”
And that’s the point – TNR had their own very biased agenda – not that they would admit it.
However if I were to find on the pages of TNR essays from soldiers reflecting the positive successes, the hope our presence has brought, and the need to press on, I’ll take my charge back.
Dana (b4a26c) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:39 pmIt’s not like the guy was drafted, alphie. If he didn’t want to take part in a glourious [sic] crusade or get blown up riding around Baghdad, all he had to do was walk past the recruiting office instead of walking in.
But since he’d written up most of this stuff before heading to Iraq and just wanted to get some credible-sounding filler for his pre-conceived story of how the Army makes you evil, he kinda sorta had to walk in.
Now I’m off to my meeting of the Staunch Republican club. I’m sure I’ll see you there, heh heh.
I'm Geekier (12dd25) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:40 pmFunny little alphie trying so hard to make the grownups mad.
I’m on to you, alphie; others will follow. Grow up or find another sandbox, kid. Your tricks have grown stale. And besides, you want to grow up, you know you do; it’s only fear holding you back.
ras (adf382) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:40 pmAlphie, I realize the distinction is lost on you, but his acts of depridation didn’t happen. The only one left that might be true is the burned woman, and that we KNOW had to have happened before he was actively a participant in the way.
So it isn’t a story about morality in war. It’s about HIS morality BEFORE a war.
As a matter of fact, I’m just waiting on my DD214’s from the Navy. Thanks for your concern.
Douche.
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:41 pmClarification:
I’m waiting on the DD-214’s to come from the navy, so I can do the paperwork for the Army.
Before you go all “navy? what are they doing” on me.
You wild Republican you…
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:42 pmras – I think Joe Wilson also fits into the category of person you have described. His endless search for pity and privacy while conducting and unending media tour is hilarious. Morality? Only the absence of it is in evidence.
daleyrocks (1ee287) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:44 pmIs Matt Sanchez lying about everything? I don’t know. But I know he’s a rent boy / porn star and has been consistently lying about it.
David Ehrenstein (c93c16) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:45 pmDana,
TNR has supported the war since the start.
If you’re going to smear an American soldier so you can maintain your all-important false sense of moral superiority, at least be truthful.
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:53 pmnono…
STB is in the army. A Soldier he isn’t. A soldier has a sense of duty, compassion, and honor. STB has none of these qualities, regardless of whether or not his tales were true or not.
And, btw, they’re not.
We can’t smear someone who has obliterated whatever credability he ever might have possesed.
In other words, it’s not slander if it’s true.
Scott Jacobs (90eabe) — 8/6/2007 @ 12:56 pmdaleyrocks,
Agreed re Joe Wilson. Politics attracts narcissists like sh*t attracts flies.
ras (adf382) — 8/6/2007 @ 1:22 pmJust like anyone who is against the Iraq fiasco (80% of Americans) aren’t really Americans, Scott?
The Cult of the Moral, in the bunker, the final days.
Carefully screening info.
Furiously booting doubters out of the club.
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 1:24 pmAt the start, not since.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 1:26 pmOr, well, not 80% of Americans.
Sounds troofy, though!
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 1:38 pmalphie, you’re sounding desperate, jumping from one arg (gets shot down) to another (ditto) to another (etc).
And still you can’t even so much as get our dander up. Know what, you’re not important enough for that, alphie. You’re just a kid, and you’ll be treated like one till you change.
Welcome to your life; choice is yours, kid.
ras (adf382) — 8/6/2007 @ 1:53 pmHey Alphie,
What are you doing over here? Why don’t you write some more comedy gold for us on the Dahlia Lithwick thread, you ‘Staunch Republican’ you?
Paul (a47125) — 8/6/2007 @ 1:59 pmBeauchamp did not write about his moral struggle, he just made stuff up to fit the TNR’s agenda.
Shocking.
Pieces in both The New Republic and The Weekly Standard are all about agenda. One enjoys seven-day-a-week exposure at Fox News, while TNR isn’t cited all that much – save for Howie Kurtz and the WaPo following a blog tantrum. Fred Barnes, William Kristol and Terry Eastland are household names compared to Franklin Foer. TNR’s circulation is way off its 2000 levels (101,651/61,024). You’re beating a derelict in a dark alley.
steve (fdc447) — 8/6/2007 @ 2:19 pmThere was a lot of discussion about this over at Blackfive when the story first broke.
Summarizing their take on things:
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 8/6/2007 @ 2:36 pm1. All of these things could have happened at some time, because there are jerks everywhere. But doubtful all these things happened to one person the way he said it did.
2. If the incident with mocking the woman with the burn happened, the concensus view is the soldier making the remark would very quickly regret it when he was immediately dealt with, officially or unofficially. One guy being a jerk happens, maybe two in the same location. But no way are the rest of the soldiers going to sit by do nothing.
3. If the mocking with a skull happened, among other things his superiors would have chewed his butt good for simply taking off his helmet while on patrol.
4. When his identity becomes known, he will realize how many people don’t share his view of the US military and are downright furious with him, and they’ll all be looking at him every day while he is still deployed.
TNR smearing people for their narrative, noble. Us smearing a writer for TNR who already has admitted to creating fiction, not noble.
We are narrowing down alphie’s morals, elusive as they are.
Scott Jacobs writes above: “Douche”.
Not sure you are writing that about alphie or Beachamp, Scott. But accurate either way.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 8/6/2007 @ 2:48 pmRobin,
An exceprt from a letter that appears in the book From Foxholes and Flight Decks:Letters Home From WWII
It was written by a soldier called Walter Commander, June 3, 1944, on the Italian Front:
I don’t care anymore that a kitten was lost out side a Virginia post office. Because the whole world is lost somewhere between the Hell of earth and the promise of Heaven. And irretrievably lost. No one can redeem what has been lost in our souls for having sinned thus against ourselves. Our children have the right to spit on us for what we are.
Yep, from the “Good War,” the one you guys so desparately cling to to bring some justification, no matter how false, to the Iraq fiasco.
It’s a pity that your moral certitude forces you to damn anyone who actually struggles with the moral cost your kind has imposed on them.
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 2:53 pmWell, steve, there’s one thing we can agree on.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 3:02 pmI was stationed in Germany and there was no moral cost imposed on me. Nor did I make shit up and sell it.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 3:03 pmAh.
Alphie, even more desperate, resorts to the Isolated Anecdotal Strategy to make his point, ‘Staunch Republican’ that he is.
Or is the Fake, But Accurate defense in the larger picture, since he defends STB’s lying narrative because it fits the picture he and other ‘Staunch Republicans’ wish to paint?
You make the call.
Paul (a47125) — 8/6/2007 @ 3:07 pmalphie, its a pity that your incoherence is inflicted upon innocent third parties. In this case, anyone in the world with an internet connection.
Paul, I just wish he’d go back to the studio.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 8/6/2007 @ 3:11 pmWait. Something was forced upon Blowchunks apart from German babes? I thought he enlisted to write a book. WTF is alphie babbling about now?
daleyrocks (906622) — 8/6/2007 @ 3:21 pmAlphie swings and misses again:
Yep, from the “Good War,” the one you guys so desperately cling to to bring some justification, no matter how false, to the Iraq fiasco.
In WWII, when the USA’s population was about 131 million, the USA lost 407,000 servicemen. Proportionate to America’s current population, this is the equivalent to 960,000 killed. Nevertheless, in the keen liberal mind, losing 3,700 in Iraq is considered a “fiasco.”
It’s a pity that your moral certitude forces you to damn anyone who actually struggles with the moral cost your kind has imposed on them.
Servicemen in Iraq are volunteers, nobody has imposed anything on them. Most of the posters on this site are damning a damn liar, not someone who struggled with a moral cost.
Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 8/6/2007 @ 3:22 pmHis petard was hoisted, rightfully so. Seeing as though he pretty much advertised this in his own blog before actually getting to the war, this is really not surprising. It is the path of Kerry – redux.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 3:43 pmFrom Sgt Beauchamp writings he sounds just like all those compassionate loving liberals we have all come to know and love – not like those mean spirited conservatives we hate!
Steve (3fd4ea) — 8/6/2007 @ 3:44 pmMore about Matt HERE
and HERE.
David Ehrenstein (c93c16) — 8/6/2007 @ 3:49 pmWow.
That’s two straight threads that Alphie the ‘Staunch Republican’ has been piled on.
Paul (a47125) — 8/6/2007 @ 3:49 pmWW1 had shell shock. WW2 had combat fatigue. Korea had combat exhaustion, my war had Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome.
Peter (c36902) — 8/6/2007 @ 3:58 pmBut this war? This war is so horrible that poor Private Beauchamp started suffering from Pre Traumatic Stress Syndrome. Takes one heck of a war to turn someone into a sh$$bird before he even arrived incountry.
I wonder if sh$$birds still go around dragging those cut-down 55 gallon drums out of the latrines, pour them woth a couple gallons of diesel fuel and then light in off and stir it all ’round with a long stick. If I had talked to someone with war scars like he claims to, no matter what the country, I would still be burning and stirring those drums, after forty+ years.
David Ehrenstein, was Sanchez’ reportage accurate?
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 4:13 pmPre Traumatic Stress Syndrome
Great observation.
Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 8/6/2007 @ 4:14 pmComing to college campuses soon: Reading and discussing the Iraq war traumatic stress syndrome.
No it wasn’t Pablo.
But to this crowd saying so is the verbal version of burning the American flag.
David Ehrenstein (c93c16) — 8/6/2007 @ 4:17 pmDavid Eherenstein – I thought you liberals held yourselves out to the be tolerant ones. I guess once the gays, blacks, and women stray from the party line, you can just savage them at will. We will await you going after Sully and the rest of teh gay on the tubes any day now.
Pablo – David does not care if Sanchez was correct or not. They just wanted to take this opportunity to pile on teh gay.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 4:20 pmExactly. Diverse, tolerant, liberal smearing of the messenger.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 4:23 pmDavid – Old news, old news, but thanks for the smear. Try to keep up and add something relevant next time.
daleyrocks (906622) — 8/6/2007 @ 4:34 pmWhat, now he’s trying to stretch a WWII letter into this? Let’s just call him “BuckShot Alphie” in honor of the only strategy he knows. Or maybe “Backside” in honor of the shot’s destination. What a doof.
ras (adf382) — 8/6/2007 @ 4:36 pmDavid E. – Outline the inaccuracies, please.
Also, do you have any updates on tough and smart foreign policy for a Magic Negro, such as talking with your enemies and invading your friends?
daleyrocks (906622) — 8/6/2007 @ 4:38 pmBeauchamp isn’t a symbol of much, and since hardly anyone read him, a folktale cul-du-sac.
The real world is asking how you lose 200,000 AK-47’s and pistols flown in for Iraqi security forces. An incredible lack of control. The current insurgency was NOT inevitable. We had the worst war plan in American history.
steve (eb120d) — 8/6/2007 @ 4:55 pmOr maybe “Backside” in honor of the shot’s destination.
Assuming he can actually hit it.
That’s a lot to assume, ras.
Paul (a47125) — 8/6/2007 @ 4:57 pmAll right, time to start playing Whack-a-troll.
Paul (a47125) — 8/6/2007 @ 4:59 pmI wonder who will play Frank Foer in Shattered Beauchamp?
Pete Brown (883608) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:01 pmsteve, you haven’t read much history have you?
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:03 pmQuick note… Fauxchamp is a PV2. He’s a private. An E-2.
He is not, nor would he ever probably make, Sgt.
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:12 pmScott – Do you think that he had encountered an Article 15 hearing prior to this. It seems strange that he would only be an E-2, given he had at least some college.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:16 pmI just think it is ironic how up in arms the Left gets when a member of one of their grievance groups steps out of line. Look at the way they go after Malkin, Justice Thomas, and Sanchez. Were Sanchez barking at the moon, his gayness would be a shield from criticism.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:24 pmI highly suspect he had.
I’m not active military, and my prior time was, shall we saw, minimal, but I see a couple of posibilities…
1 – He was an E-2 upon exiting basic, and never got promoted. If he’s the bitchy, whiney SOB I suspect he is, that’s very possible.
2 – I recall hearing that he had, at some point, listed himself as being a PFC (E-3). If I heard correctly, and he wasn’t lying then he did at some point since Germany get a reduction, either through Administrative, or an Article 15 (I don’t know if Admin reductions can be made perm without an Art. 15).
Odds are, his Administrative punishment involves half pay for 3-6 months, confinment to post for the same length of time, and a reduction in grade.
Or they just are gonna toss him into the stockade for a little while, and give him his 3 or 6 month spanking.
And I would be surprised if he gets access to a phone or computer that isn’t monitored for the rest of his time. After this, allowing him access to e-mail without it going by someone else first would be silly.
And I would wonder if he doesn’t end up with a shadow (but not the same one for long, since I doubt anyone in his unit could stand to listen to his crap for very long). If I were his 1st Sgt, I’d have someone trustworthy with him at all times, so the next story he tells, I could go “Nope. Specialist [whatever] was with him at the time, and says they did no such thing…”
And I’d think he won’t get to drive the Bradley any more…
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:26 pmHe was an E-3 at some point in Germany, so he’s been busted.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:26 pmIronic, JD? Does not seem like the correct word to me …
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:27 pmDavid is best ignored. He has such a thing about Matt Sanchez that I wonder…. Nah. Couldn’t have happened.
The German girlfriend you all are referring to is not the girl in the picture he posted, right ? Because that was another lie. He copied it from a conservative German website. He had never met her. Just another whole cloth lie.
MIke K (86bddb) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:30 pmRobin – You are right. Hypocritical two faced lying bastards. Better?
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:33 pmI too am fascinated at the Left’s reaction to Sanchez. I’m not a fan of the porn, but his being gay doesn’t matter one bit to me (and for you uncomfortable gay moment of the day – he’s not bad lookin’… I’m just sayin’).
He reported a fact.
He’s not been shown wrong.
He’s just being attacked. And why?
Teh butt seks!!!
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:34 pmIf this is the girl it’s a lie. Here she is and she doesn’t know Beauchamp. Furthermore, she’s married and Beauchamp the liar better not go back to Germany. Her husband my be looking for him.
MIke K (86bddb) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:37 pm“And if it wasn’t for that pesky bad case of acne/old football injury/desire not to get blown up riding around Baghdad in a mobile IED detector, y’all would jump at the chance yourselves.
Ah, the chickenhawk accusation again. An oldie but a goodie. So, what would you fight for alphie? If what we’re doing in Iraq is so horrible, why aren’t you over there protesting and being a human shield? Just because hurting human beings isn’t a shield to the people we’re fighting? Stand up for your principles boy, don’t just fight from the keyboard in Mama’s basement.
Scott Jacobs nailed it. Douche.
Stashiu3 (f9262c) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:39 pmJD – works for me.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:41 pmBecuz of teh gay. AND THE HYPOCRISY !!!!!
The ironic part is that I have yet to see that he is a liberal or a conservative. They have assumed conservative because he looked into the lies that were reported as truth.
I would bet dimes to dollars that he had rank taken from him long before this brouhaha ever took place. From what we know of him so far, I knew a handful of people like him in my training squadron, and they always seemed to have the overnight CQ duties.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:41 pmRobin – I was trying to be nice, after referring to AF as self-loathing.
Ironically, again, I went and looked up a few articles, and self-loathing was more often used to describe black or gay conservatives.
Staishu – alphie would make a good speedbump for a Caterpillar.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:45 pmJD – its terrible how I don’t live up to my own ideals.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:55 pmRobin – There is nothing wrong with having ideals. Much worse to not have them, than to not live up to them.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 5:59 pmI suspect a lot of the reason he wrote what he did was to grant importance to himself, since obviously the Army wasn’t recognizing his greatness.
Just think of the “horrors” he’ll witness now as a buck private…
He reminds me of an old “The Bickersons” skit.
Blanche: “My brother is a very smart man. You know that during the war he was promoted to Field Marshal”
John: “Field marshal… He was a Buck Private, and he was court martialed…
I suspect STB’s telling of his service will be much the same…
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:06 pmWhoa…
Michelle Malkin has posted that Michael Goldfarb at The Weekly Standard’s Worldwide Standard blog is reporting that Beauchamp recanted his story.
Apparently he recanted the same day TNR was running that last bit of defense of their story…
Man, won’t it be awkward when he gets home to his wife, eh?
Bet that office Christmas party will be a bit tense…
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:18 pmScott – I had read that Beauchamp recanted under oath in the military investigation, and they have effectivly closed theirs into the events reported, and I suspect will now focus on Beauchamp’s perfidy in this matter. Is there a rank lower than E-1?
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:20 pmI am looking forward to why TNR had to take in excess of 2 weeks to re-report this matter, and at the same time, claimed to have extensively fact checked this prior to publication. If that had been done, the re-reporting would not be necessary, as they could simply show their work.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:21 pmWell, now. Fauxchamp recants.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:21 pmTNR will suffer no ill effects even if they never mention this again. Glass did not kill them. Beauchamp will not kill them. They are preaching to the choir, and reading their comments threads, this will effect them not one iota.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:22 pmWill they come back from their “vacation” to acknowlege this, or just ignore it, and hope it will pass ?
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:27 pmIs there a rank lower than E-1?
Yes, it is called detention in “Fort Leavenworth Military Prison” not to be confused with the Federal Prison that is just off/borders the military base.
Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:29 pmI’ve posted; thanks for the heads up, guys.
Patterico (2a65a5) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:32 pmI would be surprised if he gets anything other than a dishonorable discharge.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:48 pmI doubt that. The only UCMJ violations would be conduct unbecoming or some such. they’ve said there’s not going to be a prosecution, and an administrative discharge probably wouldn’t be any worse than a general. If they even go there. But I think that’s likely because I’m guessing he doesn’t want to be there and they don’t want him.
Pablo (99243e) — 8/6/2007 @ 6:52 pm“alphie would make a good speedbump for a Caterpillar.”
Haha, JD,
Morally superior to the end, eh?
alphie (015011) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:04 pmI have never claimed to be morally superior to anyone. I know and acknowlege my flaws.
Chicken-pacifist !
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:07 pmI would suspect it will be a Discharge In Lieu of Court-Martial.
I wish he could get a Dishonorable Discharge though. He sure fits the requirements, just by looking at the term…
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:09 pmScott – I agree, as dishonorable would be a generous description.
However, from the military’s point of view, I can see how they would wish to wash their hands of him, post haste, and an Article 15 non-judicial punishment with a General discharge under Less than Honorable conditions would be the path of least resistance.
Certainly any type of trial or hearing will just give this asshat a larger forum, something they will want to avoid.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:13 pm[…] Patterico’s Pontifications asks a great question: Beauchamp presented this appalling tale as an example of the way that war can change human beings. But it’s really an example of how he is, at his core, a jerk. The publication has admitted that it actually happened in Kuwait — before he even reached Iraq. […]
Hopefully the End to the TNR and Scott Thomas Saga: UPDATED & Bumped at Conservative Times--Republican GOP news source. (2430bd) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:14 pmAndy B (way back in comment 14)==actually all that your argument proves is that he lied about not recognizing the woman’s uniform. He may well have lied about the woman’s existence-the anecdote would be a good way of preparing the reader to accept him and his comrades as oysgevorfen. But that would be acceptable only if the story were written to be read as a story and not as a narrative of actual events.
Patterico–re your last comment in the main post–I suggest you rephrase it. Or else submit actual instances in which TNR rejected submissions by non-Beauchamps.
kishnevi (6161c5) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:17 pmJD – A shame they don’t have a “Worthless pile of shit unfit to even look at the uniform, much less wear it Discharge”.
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:19 pmBeauchamp recanted his story.
Must be ‘V-I Day!’
Did Jamail Hussein confess, as well?
The New Republic was questionable when neocon hacks Fred Barnes, Charles Krauthammer and Andrew Sullivan ran the place. Private Beauchamp didn’t take them down any further.
steve (fdc447) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:19 pmHaha, JD,
Morally superior to the end, eh?
Alphie, you have repeatedly called Iraq “your war”. You have disavowed any stake or responsibility. So wadda___ are you but a rock-throwing propagandist working on behalf of our enemies and, in fact, also our enemy?
nk (173e2a) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:26 pmNow, Scott, that is the most appropriately named action I have seen.
“Worthless pile of shit unfit to even look at the uniform, much less wear it Discharge”.
Fake but accurate will be the meme of the day tomorrow, or how the conservatives attacked a member of the military.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:27 pmJD–I disagree with your forecast of his immediate future (but, to be clear, not your opinion of his character). Getting rid of him now would allow him to bray all over the place that he’s the victim of persecution by the pro-war side and the military.
kishnevi (6161c5) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:28 pmI’m sure the Army has at least one place available to which being posted, and selected for permanent latrine duty once there, can serve as a punishment and keep him under control for the duration of his enlistment (anyone know how long that is?) And then a less than honorable discharge. He could bray then as much as he wants, but his braying would have much less impact in one years time than it would now, in the immediate wake of the TNR story.
I agree that my prediction gets him a staff position at MediaMatters, moveon, codepink, or one of the other mainstream Dem organizations. However, his continued presence will jeopardize his safety and that of those around him, and they will not want him turning the standard disciplinary procedure into a three ringed circus. Better he bray from the Left, than make a spectacle from within. I doubt even the General discharge happens very quickly, as the has yet to be any administrative process in the military that happens rapidly.
JD (06a9d8) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:34 pmI dunno… There’s the “For the good of the service” discharge, when they just want you gone…
Scott Jacobs (a1de9d) — 8/6/2007 @ 7:48 pmScott Thomas Beauchamp: John Kerry-Lite…
Profiting from war is nothing new. I seem to remember a candidate for president awhile back who enlisted in the Vietnam war to further his career. Whether he was fabricating atrocities or re-enacting non-existent battle scenes, it was painfully obvious…
FND Blog (72c8fd) — 8/6/2007 @ 9:28 pmLet’s remember that the new Managing Editor of TNR, Franklin Foer, is the degenerate spawn of one of the farthest left “historians” on the fake-history bash-the-USA academicide front. Papa Foer has won many historical prizes for consistently unmaksing the evils in America, especially during the Reconstruction, and still presides at Columbia U., where “left” means “centrist” and “centrists” don’t exist. Foer hates America as much as his Daddy did. Peretz should fire Franklin Foer’s ass, before more hate-America spew stains TNR.
Evil Poppa begets evil son who enables evil chronicler. Just connect the dots. No fault on the left, as Mark Rudd told me decades ago when I was a deluded SDS volunteer. He smoked my dope & left me with the advice, “Dare to cheat, dare to win.” Could be Columbia U’s motto! At least when CSJ hands out Pulitzers!
daveinboca (d0db99) — 8/7/2007 @ 5:26 amThe New Republic’s disgrace…
A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about the possibility that The New Republic, a venerable center-left magazine of news and commentary, had published as news stories that weren’t true. These were three diaries by an American soldier in Iraq,…
Public Secrets: from the files of the Irishspy (72c8fd) — 8/7/2007 @ 5:59 amin know it’s far back in the thread but… #31- read your link and..AMEN!!
lover of valid logic (ed877b) — 8/7/2007 @ 1:50 pmThis guy bottom line made up a bunch of BS stories.
I suspect that most of them, particularly the mocking the disfigured woman, were made to impress his wife.
Liberal women, heck many women, are drawn to that sort of thing. The more cruelty displayed, particularly in a social setting without violence, the more “alpha” the guy is considered and the more they want him.
Ever wonder why Hollywood and Leftist types go out of their way to be cruel to people with lesser status? It gets them laid.
[As for his dueling fiancees, it probably made him a better “catch” since another woman wanted him. I’m serious about this I’ve seen it work.]
Jim Rockford (e09923) — 8/7/2007 @ 11:10 pm