Dan Rather rides again.

string the f***ker up.

It's one thing to be a douchebag. It's another to be a douchebag at the expense of your comrades in arms.

Hopefully, a bar of soap finds its way into a wool blanket and then against that sour bastards ribcage.

I'm not one to condone physical violence and such, but what this guy did is beyond reproach and he deserves much more than what he will get.

Yo, the bar of soap doesn't need to wind up in a blanket, it needs to wind up in a sock. Blankets don't swing so well.

Expect deflection by comparisons with Sgt. Aquina meant to devert attention from Liberal Media embarrassment.

List ..., as long as there's some velocity on it, I won't kabitz on the delivery mechanism.

I cannot even begin to describe the disgust I have for that ass-monkey.

Pure and simple: say what you will about the mission, but you just don't f*** your buddy. They teach that on day 1 of basic training.

And yes, that disgust extends to the morally vapid jack-weasels who printed his tripe.

Dammit, I need a shot.

Yo you crack me up.

Next step in the liberal defense.

He is a victim.

As Charles at LGF would put it: Got another one.

Sweeeeeet.

Nah, "fake but true" is too obvious in this case.

I'm guessing they'll counter with claims of another "Swiftboat" orchestrated right wing smear attack against this poor soldier.

That'll make'em all feel good again.

As the Weekly Standard put it: "Did he lie to the investigators or did he lie to his editors?"

TNR will probably claim that he only recanted under duress and stick with the "accurate with only one minor error" line.

Another question is: what will become of the whistleblower, code named Gracie, who was fired for outing this jerk, and this ridiculous series of articles?

Could TNR be compelled to rehire "Gracie" and would he want to work there even if asked?

It's a military cover up, reaching clear into the Oval Office, masterminded by Karl Rove.

Congressional hearings scheduled for September 3rd.

Meanwhile in the comments section, we have Barney on 24 hour suicide watch.

Not just Barney, we need to have jp2, jim, Hooson and Hamilton on suicide watch. And Leeward needs to be sedated stat (little medical lingo, there).

I really don't much feel the need to beat my own drum, but I oughta look back and see what day I commented that his best defence was to claim it was fiction.
=============

I don't see how Foer or the other senior editor involved in standing behind this story keep their jobs. They claimed to have multiple sources and to have "fact-checked" the "Thomas" stories, then continued to maintain the deception even knowing he had recanted.

Maybe TNR will just take the final leap and admit to being "a national journal of fiction."

Even so, they need to fire them both for violating the First Rule of Holes. If you can't obey that one religiously, you have no business in a leadership position in any organization.

The military offensive in Iraq against al-Qaeda is working. Public support for the "surge" is on the upswing.

Dreadfully bad news for liberals and Democrats.

What can they do? How about another Abu Graib? Perfect -- AG generated a lot of anti-military sentiment and bought the war protesters a lot of free airtime. Just one problem though ... but no one is currently being abused by our troops in Iraq.

No biggie ... just find some stooge to make up a bunch of crap, then print it as an "eyewitness account" of "atrocities" committed by US military personnel.

But then that plan goes up in smoke. The lies are exposed.

What next?

Downplay the victories. So what if we are "winning." Our troops are just a bunch of morally retarded losers. The bad stuff just gets censored because Bush controlls the press. And the coalition government will fall apart. See -- look over there. Everybody hates each other. This is nothing but a disaster. We should have never gone into Iraq in the first place ... blah, blah, blah.

Just wait for it.

Jim and kim,

You're both right on the money. No doubt he will claim that he was just writing a fictional "war journal" and that the onus is on TNR for stupidly mistaking his work as factual reporting rather than good creative writing.

But those claims of fact-checking by the editors are going to be rather hard to dismiss ... unless they want to claim that other editors reviewed the piece and agreed that "in fact" it was a good work of fiction.

Again, we can only laugh at the "layers and layers of fact checking" proudly boasted by the Mainstream media.

Again, we can only laugh at the "layers and layers of fact checking" proudly boasted by the Mainstream media.

Fact-checking, TNR style:

Will it hurt Bush? Yes, in fact, it will.

Will it hurt the GOP? Yes, in fact, it will.

Will it hurt the military? Yes, in fact, it will.

Will it hurt the war in Iraq? Yes, in fact, it will.

Okay, run with it.

Damn, I hate when my jokes turn out to be the truth:

"If you listen to the Chait dialogue, he once again claims that TNR vigorously fact-checked the Beauchamp pieces before publication, but states once again that what they did was ask other "experts" (read: journalists) if this "smelled good" and seemed plausible."

lol C-C-G

The truth of the matter is that in 20 years this person, will be a US Senator from Massachusetts running for POTUS. Just like his idol Flip Flop Kerry tried to do with scam.

barneyG, Lee, FreedomFRIED, Brian... call your office.

Hotline to Pluto is behind the second door on the left.

Thanks, Marc, I had forgotten about FF and Brian. We need them on suicide watch too.

The truth of the matter is that in 20 years this person, will be a US Senator from Massachusetts running for POTUS. Just like his idol Flip Flop Kerry tried to do with scam.

And when someone brings up his past fabrications, the lefty media will yell that the right is trying to "TNR-boat" him.

He is just a typical democrat. Again Swiftboating (telling the 100% truth about a democrat liar/con) came to the forefront and worked. That's why the democrats use Swiftboat as a negative term. They wouldn't know the truth if it bit them on the ass and it has bit them quite often. Do the democrats have any 'real' hero's, not the made up in their own mind crowd?

Dan Rather and CBS push phony documents about President
Bush just before a presidential election.

Bogus story about missing explosives before a Presidential election.

Haditha (impeach Murtha)

Newsweek's bogus Gitmo story including flushing Koran down toilet by our Soldiers(or Nazis according to "gulag" Durbin)resulting in riots and over 12 deaths.

Photo shopped images of the Israeli/Lebanon war by
Reuters.

Photo shopped images of our Soldiers terrorizing civilians in Afghanistan on the front page of the
LA times.

Boston paper runs bogus story about our Soldiers raping muslim women on their front page.(ended up being porno)

Eason Jordan states that our Soldiers are targeting
Journalist.(Statement made with no proof to back it
up,as usual).

Jamil Hussein and the "Six burning sunnis".

Posting enemy propaganda of our Soldiers being killed
by terrorist snipers.

Printing the secrets of how we are tracking down terrorist threats.(NSA and Bank tracking stories by the
NYT)

Jesse Macbeth,Micah Wright,Jimmy Massey, Amorita Randall,and Scott Beauchamp, all liars about our brave
men and women in uniform that the honorable media rushed to print.

Story about how President Bush and our men and women
in uniform stood against liberals,the media and our real enemy,the terrorist, to win Freedom for the people of Iraq and Afghanistan.
(Shit!!, I'm sorry, that story has not hit the front
pages yet.)

Baxter Greene, that's a very damning list of transgressions by the terrorist loving liberal media.

Wow. Who would have guessed that unverified, unevidenced rumors of improbable activities turned out not to be true? Shocking! Completely shocking!

The real question is:

Will they have the balls to bring the full power of the UCMJ and USC Title 18 to bear on him?

Gee, where are our "favorite" leftist/trolls?

They are damn quick to infest a thread complaining about why Wizbang has ignored a story as if they are Editors-in-Chief.

Here it it 8 hours after posting and nary a one can be found.

TNR did this before with Stephen Glass who wrote quite a few articles negative towards republicans. TNR stood by him until everyone exposed his as a fraud. Making up the articles out of whole cloth. Now they are at it again. This proves AGAIN that the left cannot stand the military. They so wanted this story to be true. ww

marc: you won't see them show up here too soon. They're going nuts searching Google for the slightest shred of evidence they can exaggerate to counter this. When they can't find it, they'll do one of three things:

1) either move to the next thread they can more easily twist into a scathing admonition of the author, completely forgetting this ever happened,

b) they'll bring up any number of "things that have happened in the past" to hold up against these stories as if they lend credibility to Beauchamp's claims,

iii) demand accountability, numerous links and irrefutable proof so they can then malign and personally attack the sources.

(That numbering system still makes me laugh, Paul.)

Notice that they never appeared at this thread. A veritable explosion of the cricket population there.

And BTW, I called it here.

These people won't ever be honest about anything related to Bush, the war or anyone to the right of center. In this case, it's so much more important to demonize the war than anything else that they're willing to throw our troops under the bus in the process. But they support them!

TNR will eventually throw Beauchamp under the bus, once they realize they can no longer bluff their way through this debacle.

First they defend, then they deny, then they cut and run.

Oyster, I'm DEEPLY offended for several reasons.

1) the numbering system goes 1 - B - III - d.

B) I used it here well before Paul ever did -- IF he ever did. I don't recall him ever using it.

III) I stole it, fair and square, from "Car Talk."

d) Paul gets enough credit for stuff; he doesn't need any of MINE.

In short, giving him credit for it is sheer and utter -- wait for it -- "codswallop."

J.

eek! My sincerest apologies, Jay. I'm a thoughtless and shallow excuse of a human being. To fall from your graces pains me.

*hangs head in shame*

:)

Oyster:

These people won't ever be honest about anything related to Bush, the war or anyone to the right of center.

Agreed, and with the surge "surging" and public support for the war jumping ten points in a month and finally the leaker of the NSA program is being run-to-ground in addition to Obama again looking the fool we may see a bit less of them. Not likely, but possible.

Let's remember that the new Managing Editor of TNR, Franklin Foer, is the 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.

Evil Poppa begets evil son who enables evil chronicler. Just connect the dots.

oh, come on, you chimpybots. the armies oil theives in cheif just waterborded scott until he sined that confesion.

chimpy cant have any one telling the atrosities that relly go on in iraqu.

With all due respect (well not really) I'll wait till some source other than the Weekly Standard verifies the story.

Meanwhile, as for the "surge" "surging" here's an interesting article today entitled "As British Pull back Basra Deteriorates." Yeah, things are going swimmingly well in Iraq. Both sides trying like hell to kill one another off the minute the troops leave a place they've supposedly made safe. We should be busy trying to achieve "victory" over a civil war blood bath - great.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/06/AR2007080601401.html?hpid=topnews

For those that would claim that the incidents really happened, but Scottie lied that they did not to keep himself out of trouble with the army, uh-uh.

The most trouble he can get into by coming clean with an official army investigation is perhaps Administrative punishment. He is already an E2 (down from E3), so there is a limit on what they can do to him (bust him to E1 for a few months, put him on kybo duty for the rest of his tour, etc.).

If you lie during an official investigation, then you run the risk of breaking large rocks into small ones at Leavenworth for YEARS. Lying -- whether you lie by claiming you saw things that you did not or lie by claiming you did not see things that you did say -- would be punished more severely than any crime Scottie committed by inventing stories for Foolish Freddie Foer, or by admitting the things he wrote about were true.

If they were true and he did not report them, the punishment he faces would be less than he would face by claiming they did happen in Shock Troops, and then lying and claiming they did not happen in during the official investigation. If the events did happen, there were other witnesses that would be wanting to protect their butts against charges of lying to an Army investigator, and it only takes one person cracking for the truth to come out.

Scottie made the percentage move when interrogated under oath. He told the truth.

They're shoddy "investigation" was being dismantled but someone doing a real investigation Yes, this is the same Army and Pentagon Public Affairs office that investigated the Pat Tillman affair. "In three years of struggling with the Pentagon's public affairs apparatus, we have never been dealt with honestly," Tillman's family has said.

Ahh, I knew the lefties would show up sooner or later.

JFO, if you wanna wait before admitting you were suckered by a story that you wanted to believe was true, so be it.

Meanwhile, I'll start preparing your lunch.

Would you like your crow baked or fried?

Hey, Steve, you clearly show that you didn't even bother to look at the link Paul posted.

The link to the real investigation is to the Confederate Yankee blog, not the US Army.

CY has been talking to multiple sources within the Army, and has gotten the same response from all of them. Therefore, there are two conclusions one can draw:

1) They're all telling the truth.

2) They've been ordered to lie from above.

Looks like you're going to agree with "eddy" above and pick numero dos, Steve.

Not that I am surprised, mind you.

CCG

Never read any of his stuff, don't read TNR. Not really aware till the wizzers jumped all over it. But then you'd want to talk about that kind of thing rather than a headline that says when troops left, Basra deteriorated, wouldn't you?

But then you'd want to talk about that kind of thing rather than a headline that says when troops left, Basra deteriorated, wouldn't you?

Nice red herring, JFO.

Stick to the topic at hand, willya?

there ya' go again, JFO, mixing your oranges in the apple bowl.

Granted, the British pull-out from Basra has lead to some less-than-ideal results (then again, show me any conflict throughout history that's ever gone exactly as planned), but what does that have to do with the surge?

Furthermore, what does Basra have to do with the subject at hand?

I admire your enthusiasm for trying to push your point down our throats and such, but you're a bit off the mark (and, by a "bit," I mean "WAY OFF").

Then again, if you don't have a strong argument for/against an issue, it's best to fill the air with balloon juice and hope for the best, right?

At least you're consistent.

...admitting that all three articles he published in the New Republic were exaggerations and falsehoods--fabrications containing only "a smidgen of truth...

Shades of John Kerry. Scum hoisted on the shoulders of roaches.

"Scum hoisted on the shoulders of roaches."

Those must be some impressive roaches.

You know what I love....

Ya know what I really freaking love...

The lefty trolls are now smacked in the face with the fact a liberal rag published lies about our military AND THEY BOUGHT IT HOOK LINE AND SINKER; defending the liars repeatedly.

And the sum total of their response is not to get mad a TNR... No, their whole response is "Look, behind that tree, a bunny!"

"Look, behind that tree, a bunny!"

Where?! What tree?! I wanna see a bunny!

Don't tease me, man ... show me the bunny!

jfo:
"With all due respect (well not really) I'll wait till some source other than the Weekly Standard verifies the story."

Why do lefties always come up with an answer such as this, when they were more than willing to be duped in the first place? Why, when the TNR stories came out, did jfo and his ilk not say, "With all due respect (well not really) I'll wait till some source other than TNR verifies the story." I think we all know the answers to these questions. Pathetic. jfo and his ilk should be as ashamed as beauchump, but not likely.

But then you'd want to talk about that kind of thing rather than a headline that says when troops left, Basra deteriorated, wouldn't you?

Actually JFO, (to address your bunny) yes I would like to talk about it. I've been planning a post on Basra. There are GREAT lessons to be learned in Basra. I won't spoil the post but the punchline is that if you want to screw things up in Iraq, do what the liberals keep telling us to do.

But for now, please stick to the topic at hand....

JFO:

With all due respect (well not really) I'll wait till some source other than the Weekly Standard verifies the story.

What does that have to do with anything? Did you apply the same standard to the original articles from TNR?

Meanwhile, as for the "surge" "surging" here's an interesting article today entitled "As British Pull back Basra Deteriorates." Yeah, things are going swimmingly well in Iraq. Both sides trying like hell to kill one another off the minute the troops leave a place they've supposedly made safe. We should be busy trying to achieve "victory" over a civil war blood bath - great.

The fact that Basra is deteriorating as the Brits pull back shows exactly why withdrawal from Iraq is such a bad idea. If this happens on the small scale of Basra with U.S. forces still in country, imagine what would happen on the larger scale with U.S. forces gone.

People keep comparing Iraq to Vietnam. Maybe one of the lessons from Vietnam that should be remembered was that a whole lot of people died when the U.S. withdrew from the country.

Well, for those who think I'm off topic I was simply commenting on #35 - now I know you folks never comment about another's comment do you?

A red herring? I'd rather say a red bloodbath - a redundancy I know. But as I say you'd rather talk about the 'evil" "media" than a failed war policy wouldn't you?

As for the "issue", as I said I'll wait for another source other than Billy's Kristols RAH RAH war Daily Standard. If the guy lied, fire him. If he violated the UCMJ prosecute him. Kind of end of story isn't it?

jfo, ONCE AGAIN, why did you not apply this same standard to the original TNR stories?!?! Why are you being such a hypocrite?

Well I never read the original TNR stories, don't read TNR, don't care about TNR. Hypocrite? My, my - tsk tsk.

Does it strike anyone else as interesting that the Left will instantly believe that a soldier is a thoughtless, murderous, insensitive, puppy crushing child abuser, but NOT that he just makes the S*** up?

What kind of cognitive dissonance does it take to believe that a person's stories of committing abuse MUST be true because such a person would never lie?

Ben

"A red herring? I'd rather say a red bloodbath - a redundancy I know."

Ugh. That comment is just dripping with the douchey goodness which is the Liberal debate tactic:

Not only will you try to distract us with a bunny, you'll also step on its head to show us, specifically how Bush Lied, People Died. If we don't see the connection, it's due to us just being ignorant "wizzers." It has nothing to do with you talking out your a**.

As for the commenting on the comments, you'd have yourself a damn fine point there, if your response were even remotely connected to the subject of the comment.

I mean, that's why you put in the "However" right? To show us ignorant maroons that you were switching topics? Or, is my understanding of the English language just that bad?

Hey Paul, why is it that whenever JFO shows up, the comments section starts to look like a scene from "Watership Down?"

"Both sides trying like hell to kill one another off the minute the troops leave a place they've supposedly made safe. We should be busy trying to achieve "victory" over a civil war blood bath - great."

JFO, even if this was remotely the topic of the thread, doesn't this completely undermine the "things'll be just fine the moment we get out of there, all the violence is due to our presence" meme your high priests are trying to pull off? Isn't the chance of a bloodbath when we leave a good argument NOT to leave? Or did that only count in Bosnia and Kosovo?

Or does the idea that a US withdrawal from Iraq might lead to much higher civilian losses elicit thinking along the lines of "I know, that'll be so COOL because we can blame it on BUSH!" from our "compassionate" Left?

Ben

"Well I never read the original TNR stories, don't read TNR, don't care about TNR. Hypocrite? My, my - tsk tsk."

... and you're commenting in this thread because ...?

"Well I never read the original TNR stories, don't read TNR, don't care about TNR. Hypocrite? My, my - tsk tsk."

Now you're just spinning, who cares if you read the TNR stories or not, are you trying to tell us that you weren't aware of them? Are you trying to tell us that you didn't know what the whole Scott Thomas Beachump affair was all about?!?! Somehow I find that hard to believe, but if that is the case, why do you feel it appropriate to comment on it now? So once again I ask you, if you are NOW going to wait until appropriate verification, why were you not willing to wait for appropriate verification in the FIRST place? Fake but accurate all over again, just throw out an accusation hoping it sticks. You're pathetic.

Just made a trip over to blue to see what they had to say about 'chump. Guess. lol Wonder if they will ever get tired of talking to themselves? (Kim keeps them in their place tho)

Exactly yo, we are to believe that jfo never read the stories, nor did he know what was going on, but NOW all of a sudden he is interested and thinks we should reserve judgement!

"Now when are you going to admit that you don't know what you are talking about, and you owe the Prvt an apology?"
Posted by BarneyG2000 | July 26, 2007 7:29 PM |

So, barney, when are you going to admit that you're a slimy piece of garbage and owe the entire military an apology?

"The right is so paranoid of any negative story out of Iraq they have to do all they can to discredit it."
Posted by BarneyG2000 | July 26, 2007 8:44 PM |

barney and the left are so paranoid of the military, GWB, positive news, and any chance of victory in Iraq that all they can do is try to discredit them with stories such as beauchump's.

"I want to know the truth; while the right just wants to discredit and smear."
Posted by BarneyG2000 | July 27, 2007 1:32 PM |

HA! Good God you can't make this stuff up!

You guys must have me confused with someone else. I never thought the actions depicted were that shocking (juvenile and in bad taste) or a reflection of the troops on whole. I entered the debate due to the overwhelming certainty that the Prvt did not exist. Once it was established that the Prvt was an actual soldier in Iraq I wanted a recant from the doubters and accusers. None were coming.

As far as whether this story is true or not we will wait and see when the official report is released (should be shortly since the story already broke).

In all this hoopla, we should all step back a bit and commend TNR for its intense and successful internal investigation to identify and fire its whistleblower, and the last known honest man to work there.

So demanding and exhausting it was that vacations were handed out all around.

Then let it not be said that TNR is incapable of the rigorous investigation so required to re-report these events. Rather, let us note the stalwart defense of its reporter-novelist in the face of intense scrutiny and despite the facts as we now know them to be.

And this brutally efficient internal control, coupled with state of the art improbable propaganda, recalls the halcyon days of Pravda and the KGB.

In grand company they, and a fine model for lefties everywhere.

ok barney, same question, why did YOU not apply the same wait and see standard to the original reports?! For God's sake, could you be anymore blatantly hypocritical?!

And before you claim that you didn't lend credence to the original stories barney, THIS is what you had to say about them!

You guys are more upset that the Prvt exposed the ugly side of our occupation then the acts themselves.
Posted by BarneyG2000 | July 26, 2007 6:31 PM |

Furthermore, your argument about people saying the Pvt. didn't exist is ridiculous, because that argument was about Pvt. Thomas, WHO DIDN'T EXIST.

Further comments from barney claiming the original stories were true:

Their first attempt was to say the Prvt never existed and the stories were a hoax. Now that they have been proven wrong they are trying to spin the story in a new direction.
Posted by BarneyG2000 | July 26, 2007 8:44 PM |

Where is that "wait and see" standard here barney?

I don't think anyone here needs to reserve judgment. It's never stopped you before, so why would I expect you to now? I made a comment about Paul's source - the Weekly Standard. And then responded to another commenter's comment about the surge. Pretty much it.

Paul says he's working on a piece about Basra and we can chat about that when it's posted. Meanwhile when the Weekly Standard is the source of something about the war, I wait for further confirmation. Maybe they're right. All of you, of course, assume they are. I'll wait for more.

You're still ignoring the question jfo, why did you not apply your same standard of waiting for further confirmation to the original stories? Did you have no idea what this story was all about? And if so, why come comment here that we all need to reserve judgement if you don't know what the story is about and if you never applied that reasoning to the original stories?!

JFO, deflect much?

It is an interesting, yet ineffective ploy to change the subject. It means you have LOST your argument.

Let's take a closer look at what that means, JFO, Barney Fife, jp2, FreedomJerk, etc...

You are no doubt disheartened that this "soldiers" story of attrocious behaviour within the military are absolute fabrications.
I assert that the majority of Americans who love their country, EVEN those who disagree with the President, or our involvement in Iraq, would be RELIEVED that the stories had zero validity... If John F'n Kerry were POTUS, and Iraq was being overseen by a Democratic White house, the sane among us would still share he same support for the military, not hope that stories of misconduct appearing in some birdcage liner was true.

No, instead you (and your bottom-feeding kind) consider the revelation of total fiction by this tool to be a setback for your cause...

What is that cause?

Everything you seem to argue (poorly) for or against seems to be counterintuitive for anyone with even a minimal love of their country.

Do you hate America solely for the acts of the current administration? Perhaps for your dislike of the POTUS?

Do you hate America for some other reason?

Stop being such p*ssies, and lay it on the line. Honestly, use a little introspection to determine why it is you share a view of this great Nation that are counter-productive at best... treasonous at worst.

Disagreeing with people who love and take pride in America and those who defend her, merely for the sake of being contrary to your world view, is both childish and cowardly.

Like the ignorant kids wearing the "Che" t-shirts you are the attention-seeking whores who enjoy being contrary just for the sake of being contrary. "Look at me!... I am a non-conformist!... i speak (my)Truth to Power!... From the safety of my keyboard!"

Which of you would physically approach a soldier returning from Iraq, one on one, and tell him you know of the heinous acts you believe he has committed?

Thought so.

Not only do I question your patriotism (it has been established that you have none), I question your entire belief system...Rational people cannot think as you do.

Apologies for the rant... Except to the wastes of skin it's directed at.

Well said S.O.G. It is truly, truly disturbing that jfo, barney and the like are dissapointed at the prospect of these stories being proven false. I just can't even imagine what goes on in their dark and twisted minds. If jfo had any intellectual honesty whatsoever, he would have simply said, "With all due respect (well not really) I'll wait till some source other than the Weekly Standard verifies the story. AS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE WITH THE ORIGINAL TNR STORIES. Let us hope you are all correct and these awful stories turn out to be false"

"Once it was established that the Prvt was an actual soldier in Iraq I wanted a recant from the doubters and accusers."

Is that why you said, "You guys are more upset that the Prvt exposed the ugly side of our occupation then the acts themselves."

or: "The right is so paranoid of any negative story out of Iraq they have to do all they can to discredit it."

Among many other things. The point is, Barney, that while you stated that you didn't know if the stories were true, you did everything you could to try and find evidence that they were.

The difference here is so wide one could drive a Peterbuilt thru it. While you're valiantly trying to find evidence of truth to Beauchamp's stories with the flimsiest of questions...

1) Can a Bradley do that? Implying that if it can then the stories are more likely to be true.

2) OMG! A cemetery was indeed discovered! You were trying to establish the fact that a soldier would put a skull on his head and prance around simply based on the fact that a cemetery was discovered.

...we, meaning me and others besides you, are trying to find the truth - period. Another difference is also clear as a bell; while we're willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the un-named and anonymous soldiers being slandered, you, by your every deed and word, show a willingness to believe more that the stories are true than that they aren't and are far more concerned about Beauchamp's reputation than those who are unable to defend themselves from your implications.

You can deny it Barney, but it just ain't gonna fly.

"ok barney, same question, why did YOU not apply the same wait and see standard to the original reports?! For God's sake, could you be anymore blatantly hypocritical?!" by dhoggs

I wrote this (one of my first comments on the story):
http://wizbangblog.com/content/2007/07/26/military-investigation-into-the-claims-of-diarist-revealed-as-scott-thomas-beauchamp-1.php#comment-621625

"I do not know if the stories are are true, partially true or not."

So yes, I did have a wait and see attitude, but you already knew that since you lifted quotes directly from the exact same post.

Talk about being dishonest.

Hang in there Barn.. Hairy Reed and Shumer will fix everything for ya.

Who cares if you wrote that barney, you ALSO WROTE THIS!!!!

"You guys are more upset that the Prvt exposed the ugly side of our occupation then the acts themselves."

"Their first attempt was to say the Prvt never existed and the stories were a hoax. Now that they have been proven wrong they are trying to spin the story in a new direction."

You are claiming here that what he wrote is fact!

I ask again barney, why do you want to wait and see now, when you didn't then? AND YOU DIDN'T THEN!!! REPEAT:

"You guys are more upset that the Prvt exposed the ugly side of our occupation then the acts themselves."

"Their first attempt was to say the Prvt never existed and the stories were a hoax. Now that they have been proven wrong they are trying to spin the story in a new direction."

All your cut and paste jobs just support my argument. I was pointing out the lengths the right will go to perpetrate your fantasy about Iraq. Again, I did find the actions all that terrible or surprising (compared to rapes, murders and loosing nearly 200K automatic weapons). We have kids making fun of someone's looks, killing dogs and playing with bodies. Is that the norm? No! but does it happen when bored kids are stationed in a hell-hole for 14-months?

I pointed out evidence that those things could have happened.

On the other hand, there is obvious evidence that the Surge Is Working, headlines/stories are very wrong. Where are the fact checkers from the right?

The number of US causalities in July were twice the number than in July 2006 and higher than the average monthly total for 2006. The number of Iraqi causalities in July were higher than 2006 and and higher than June of 2007. The Sunnis have quit the government, and the rest have left for vacation.

Is that the goal of the surge? Same or worst than 2006?

"Who cares if you wrote that barney,.."

Good comeback dhoggs. Did you learn that in debating school?

JFO:

Well I never read the original TNR stories, don't read TNR, don't care about TNR. Hypocrite? My, my - tsk tsk.

Translated:

"I don't know shit about what's being discussed. Didn't trouble myself to learn, but I don't let my ignorance stop me. Never have. Never will."

The number of US causalities in July were twice the number than in July 2006 and higher than the average monthly total for 2006. The number of Iraqi causalities in July were higher than 2006 and and higher than June of 2007. The Sunnis have quit the government, and the rest have left for vacation.

Barney
Surely you jest....

There is an escalation going on; it's called the "surge". How many times must this point be made?

This is why I just make fun of Barney et al. They are never wrong. Period. They're not about finding out the truth of any situation, they're all about winning one for their side and if a few lies have to be told or ignored, well, you can't make an omelet without killing a few chickens.
A few people linked to a Balloon Juice post (a site and blogger I used to really like) and his whole post was basically, "Sure I was wrong, but I was right! And the Reich-wingers? Sure they were right, but they were wrong!"
Read it, it's a beautiful distillation of insane lefty thought that has me wondering if John Cole is just doing performance art.
In other words, I'm wondering if he's not being obtuse and nitwity on purpose just to see how the different sides react. I mean, he actually admits that Beauchamp is a fabulist, but claims victory. That's as beautiful a distillation of the dishonesty and logical bankruptcy of the left as can be seen anywhere outside of Ace of Spades or IMAO.

But by all means you progressives you, keep screaming to the heavens that your "facts" are more correct than mine, I won't really respond, I'll just point and laugh.

Now JFO and his buddies are wanting a wait a see. Then when the official report comes out validating the Weekly Standards piece, JFO and his buddies will say we will have to wait for the investigation into the pentagon to see if they acted appropriately in interviewing the wayward soldier.

You lefties are a predictable lot. JFO doesn't read TNR? But he does read Weekly Standard. Yeah. I believe it. Your liberal buddies who were all excited about the shock troops articles are now running for cover. I noticed it took you trolls a while to show up. I imagine you searched long and hard for your excuses. They are very weak. I can tell when JFO immediately trys to hijack the topic with in ranting of "blood", "killing", etc. That is a sure sign that they were caught with the lies. ww

Part of my message got cut off Barney...sorry about that . the remainder below:

Guadalcanal, Iwo, Normandy, the Bulge......all resulted in increased casualties because of an escalation in combat. They were all "surges".

BTW, how many times have the Sunnis taken their ball and gone home? They will be back because they have no choice.

babble2000 said:

The number of US causalities in July were twice the number than in July 2006 and higher than the average monthly total for 2006.

VERY SELECTIVELY WORDED talking point you cut an pasted babble...

Reality Check:

=====================
U.S. Toll in Iraq Lowest in 8 Months

By KIM GAMEL
The Associated Press
Tuesday, July 31, 2007; 5:09 PM

BAGHDAD -- American military deaths for July rose to 73 on Tuesday with the report of a Marine killed in combat, but the toll was still the lowest in eight months as the U.S. said it was gaining control of former militant strongholds.
=====================

You didn't "lie" Babble2000 but you're sure not telling the truth.

"Who cares if you wrote that barney,.."

Good comeback dhoggs. Did you learn that in debating school?"

As I said barney, it means nothing that you said...
"I do not know if the stories are are true, partially true or not."

...when in the same breath you say, "You guys are more upset that the Prvt exposed the ugly side of our occupation then the acts themselves."

"Their first attempt was to say the Prvt never existed and the stories were a hoax. Now that they have been proven wrong they are trying to spin the story in a new direction."

Well, it means nothing other than that you are a disgusting hypocrite. You say you don't know if the stories are true, yet at the same time you say the Pvt. was correct, and that attempts to show he was lying were PROVEN wrong!! Jesus, you are a fucking moron.

And it is amazing to me that you really want the U.S. to lose just so liberals can have power. That's repulsive.

"You didn't "lie" Babble2000 but you're sure not telling the truth." Paul

Really, let's look at the facts. You say the causality count was the lowest in 8-months. Let's see if that is deceptive. The count for July was 80. The count for March was 81, Feb 81 and Jan 83. Hardly a statistical difference.

Over the last two years the number of causalities in July dropped compared to the previous of next month:

2005
June = 85
July = 54
Aug = 78

2006
June = 65
July = 43
Aug = 61

So a drop in July of 07 is meaningless (as far as tracking progress), but the right points to this one statistic as proof the surge is working.

Now who is not telling the truth?

http://icasualties.org/oif/

I just checked TNR's website and this is posted:

"A STATEMENT ON SCOTT THOMAS BEAUCHAMP:
We've talked to military personnel directly involved in the events that Scott Thomas Beauchamp described, and they corroborated his account as detailed in our statement. When we called Army spokesman Major Steven F. Lamb and asked about an anonymously sourced allegation that Beauchamp had recanted his articles in a sworn statement, he told us, "I have no knowledge of that." He added, "If someone is speaking anonymously [to The Weekly Standard], they are on their own." When we pressed Lamb for details on the Army investigation, he told us, "We don't go into the details of how we conduct our investigations."

--The Editors

posted 2:32 p.m."

And you take their word for that jfo, or shall we wait for further confirmation?! Ha, indeed.

I didn't say that did I goofball. But you bet your life you take the RAH RAH WAR Weekly Standard's word.

Yeah, you bet your life I do jfo. Because all of these "stories" were totally unsubstantiated in the first place!! And you aren't fooling anyone jfo, you've come out saying we need to wait until further confirmation of the Weekly Standard story, but never ONCE said the same for the TNR stories, now you come out cutting and pasting the TNR statement in your underhanded attempt to give the stories credence. You're pathetic.

barney, "Now who is not telling the truth?"

Ummm, you barney. Paul said July was the lowest rate in 8 months, according to the link YOU pasted, that is correct, regardless of by how many. You say it is deceptive to say the count is the lowest in 8 months. How exactly is that deceptive when that is exactly what the statistics say barney?!

Lets not let the important points here escape us:

1. A member liberal media has once again foisted a piece of propoganda on us. Propoganda that was supposedly "fact checked", and immediately sucked up by most of the left as the iron-clad truth.
2. When confronted with the facts, the rats scurry. Instead of admitting that this puts a serious dent in what credibility the left media still has, you guys want to either change the subject, or obfuscate.

Barney, open up your little peanut brain and suck this in: if a soldier blatently lied, and made up a story, that is EXACTLY the same as if the person was not a soldier, and wrote the same fiction from somewhere else. The point is that it was fiction. It is absolutely irrelevant where he wrote it from. If it didn't happen, it didn't happen PERIOD.

Sheesh - what a f*cking moron!

Well Hog, I'll say it then. The TNR stories should be substantated independent of the author and TNR. How's that? Now will you say the same about the Weekly Standard? I'll anxiously await your reply.

JFO still wants to change the topic. The topic is the lying TNR and the liberal bias in the media. JFO wants to talk about the Weekly Standard. Yeah! He has a firm grasp on the subject. ww

As usual Willie, you read between the lines or not all all. Here's the very first sentence by the author of the thread:

"The score stands at Weekly Standard 1, New Republic 0"

Take your blinders off willie, smell the roses, come up for air, breath deep and take a rteading comprehension course.

ok JFO the new score stands thusly:

"Weekly Standard 1, New Republic huh?"

The point is babble2000....

You're trying to make the case that the surge (today) is failing... but you're using a flawed metric to measure it. Why not compare it to 2000 when the casualties are zero?

The point is the surge is working.

And that fact really pisses you off.

That's how pathetic you are.

Paul you may well be right about that but don't really know do you? Surely you hope so?

don't know what?

Wow, so why did it take hours of tooth pulling to get you to show a smidgen of intellectual honesty jfo?! And I would say the same about the Weekly Standard, except that it has ZERO significance in light of the fact that TNR published unsubstantiated stories with ZERO fact checking in the first place! This is ludicrous. What this boils down to is the typical lefty tactic of throwing shit and hoping it sticks, instead of PROVING someone to be guilty of what they claim, they DEMAND that person prove their innocence!! You know, I heard that jfo raped dogs at Michael Vick's house...PROVE ME WRONG dog raper!!

Logically, if we were failing in Iraq, and we sent in more troops, the death rate for troops should increase - as there are more troops present, exposed to more danger.

The fact that with more troops, there are less deaths equates to the surge being successful. If the liberals really care about the troops, they should immediately demand that we send even more in - since the last month has proven that more troops = less deaths.

You're going to try to speak logically to jfo and barney?!

Hog:

You don't disappoint me a bit as I have such low expectations from ilk like you. You crow and bleat and bloviate all day about the lying TNR because Bill Krisrtols Weekly Standard War Rag says something supposedly disproving TNR with no accompanying verification of any kind. Yet you will not hold yourself to the same standard (no pun intended) as you demand for me.

You're weak and a weasel Hog- commune with me no more!!

NO, no, no, no NO jfo. I am not crowing and bleating about lying TNR because of what the Weekly Standard says. I am crowing about the lying TNR because they have not put forth one SHRED of evidence that any of these stories have happened, and not one person has corroborated any of these stories in fact quite the opposite!! I have been crowing about the lying TNR LONG before the Weekly Standard piece even came out, which is why I said:

"I would say the same about the Weekly Standard, except that it has ZERO significance in light of the fact that TNR published unsubstantiated stories with ZERO fact checking in the first place!"

Can you comprehend that jfo? I couldn't care less what the Weekly Standard says, I have been complaining about the lying TNR from DAY ONE. There is ZERO evidence supporting anything that baechump wrote. I believe evidence should be put forth. Apparently you do not. So once again, I couldn't care less what the Weekly Standard says, it matters not in light of TNR's accusations, WHICH I HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT FROM DAY ONE.

Still no evidence put forth by jfo that he didn't rape Vick's dogs. SO it IS true!!!

JFO - quoting the Weekly Standard:

When we called Army spokesman Major Steven F. Lamb and asked about an anonymously sourced allegation that Beauchamp had recanted his articles in a sworn statement, he told us, "I have no knowledge of that." He added, "If someone is speaking anonymously [to The Weekly Standard], they are on their own."

You've parroted TNR in an effort to discredit the possibility they were wrong all along.

Your proof? That Major Lamb had no knowledge of a recantation NOT the the ARMY had no knowledge.

Despite his position as PAO it IS possible he answered TNR's query with the truth but you are attempting to conflate that way beyond reality.

BUT what we DO KNOW and by a named source (Major Lamb) is this..."An investigation has been completed and the allegations made by PVT Beauchamp were found to be false. His platoon and company were interviewed and no one could substantiate the claims."

http://op-for.com/2007/08/he_said_she_said.html

"TNR's defense seems to ride solely on whether or not Beauchamp signed paperwork, which neither Lamb nor Boylan will admit is true, arguing that such information is part of an internal investigation.
But they both state that Beauchamp was lying, as fact."

As well as an update from Goldfarb:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/08/beauchamp_recants_update.asp

I just want to see the slimy little bastard go to jail for the UCMJ and Title 18 violations.

JFO, if you want to critique my reading comprehension, please, at the very least make sure your spelling is correct when you insult someone. The point of this post is that the TNR, in its eagerness to put forth a story that will damage the military thus hurting GW, did not bother to fact check their stories. Since they have done this before, you think they would learn, but their hate for the military, Iraq and GW is so great, they comprimised their integrity. In fact, so have you. You are so upset at TWS that you cannot deal with one of your rags doing this. ww

willie

I'll let you teach me to type better if you let me teach you reading comprehension.