Infamous ‘Shock Troops’ Author Back in the News
Was it wrong for the New Republic to withdraw its support for Scott Thomas Beauchamp's series of anti-military articles?
It seemed we’d heard the last of Scott Thomas Beauchamp and Elspeth Reeve in late January, after I posted copies of the sworn statements gathered during the “Shock Troops” investigation on my blog. The documents included Beauchamp’s own sworn statements — his first, where he did not see any of the minor atrocities written about in “Shock Troops,” and a backdated one where he finally admits he was the author. The documents also included the sworn statements from 22 other soldiers saying that the minor atrocities written about in “Shock Troops” were events that they did not witness.
Even the editor of the New Republic, Franklin Foer, announced a month previously in December that he could not stand behind Beauchamp’s stories. But just when we though it was all behind us, Beauchamp is back, (with his former fact checker wife still supporting him), courtesy of Spencer Ackerman in Radar magazine.
In “Notes on a Scandal,” Ackerman interviews Scott Beauchamp and Elspeth Reeve — and no one else — and shockingly comes to the conclusion that the magazine that fired Ackerman for his anti-war views was wrong to pull its support for a series of articles (”Shock Troops” was just one of three Beauchamp stories) that reinforced those views.
How did Ackerman conduct this investigation? He hung out with Beauchamp and Reeve at a bar and later communicated with them via email. What he did not do is present any evidence to support the contention that Beauchamp’s claims are true, or that Franklin Foer was wrong to pull support for stories that still lack on-the-record evidence of any kind.
On the first page of “Notes on a Scandal,” Ackerman attacks Michael Goldfarb, a McCain campaign blogger formerly of the Weekly Standard, for posting a claim that Beauchamp signed a sworn statement conceding that the events written about in “Shock Troops” were falsified. This was an error, as Beauchamp, to this day, has never recanted “Shock Troops.”
What his statements did prove is that Scott Beauchamp is either great at parsing language — or he lied.
In “Shock Troops,” Beauchamp wrote:
I know another private who really only enjoyed driving Bradley Fighting Vehicles because it gave him the opportunity to run things over. He took out curbs, concrete barriers, corners of buildings, stands in the market, and his favorite target: dogs. Occasionally, the brave ones would chase the Bradleys, barking at them like they bark at trash trucks in America–providing him with the perfect opportunity to suddenly swerve and catch a leg or a tail in the vehicle’s tracks. He kept a tally of his kills in a little green notebook that sat on the dashboard of the driver’s hatch. One particular day, he killed three dogs. He slowed the Bradley down to lure the first kill in, and, as the diesel engine grew quieter, the dog walked close enough for him to jerk the machine hard to the right and snag its leg under the tracks. The leg caught, and he dragged the dog for a little while, until it disengaged and lay twitching in the road. A roar of laughter broke out over the radio. Another notch for the book. The second kill was a straight shot: A dog that was lying in the street and bathing in the sun didn’t have enough time to get up and run away from the speeding Bradley. Its front half was completely severed from its rear, which was twitching wildly, and its head was still raised and smiling at the sun as if nothing had happened at all.
I didn’t see the third kill, but I heard about it over the radio.
Beauchamp’s statement that he “didn’t see the third kill” is an indirect claim that the saw the first two as he described them, yet in his first sworn statement, before admitting to being the author, he wrote:
I have never hit a dog with a Brad or even wanted to. I swerve to avoid them. I’m a new driver, so I drive very carefully. I have just begun driving within the past couple of months and I have not seen a dog hit within that time.
Page 1 of 2 Next ->
Bob Owens blogs at Confederate Yankee.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
63 Comments
1. Susan Katz Keating:I’m not surprised that Ackerman would write such drivel, but cannot decide whether to be shocked or amused that Beauchamp would try to redeem himself in the light of such overwhelming evidence. Is he seeking publicity as part of a job hunt, perhaps? If so, I’ve got the perfect employer: the Chinese Olympic committee. They never met a fact they couldn’t fudge.
Aug 22, 2008 - 12:13 pm 2. Fen:“Is he seeking publicity as part of a job hunt, perhaps?”
Running for Congress as a Democrat? Maybe Haditha Murtha will be his mentor.
Aug 22, 2008 - 12:19 pm 3. David Thomson:Why in heaven name did Scott Thomas Beauchamp agree to this interview? It does him no good whatsoever. Alas, his past will always catch up to him. A potential employer only needs to insert Beauchamp’s name into any search engine. There is simply too much evidence concerning his deceitful behavior available on the Internet. He should seriously consider changing his name.
Aug 22, 2008 - 12:28 pm 4. ZEITGEIST:[...] Bob Owens has much, much more. “Spencer Ackerman does a great job of parroting what Beauchamp has been saying all along, and [...]
Aug 22, 2008 - 12:56 pm 5. Letalis Maximus, Esq.:Why is this puke still around? So many brave men and women have died and been injured in Iraq and Afghanistan, and this jerk off walks the earth without a scratch. Life is truly not fair.
Aug 22, 2008 - 1:05 pm 6. Tom W.:The thing to always keep in mind about Beauchamp is that he’s a horribly inept writer, a guy without even the slightest shred of talent. Despite the mortifying, amateurish claptrap he churns out (see below), he still thinks he’s a rising star who will revolutionize the art.
What is it about incompetent leftists who think they’re Messiahs?
“bavarian stories in some sort of rounded metaphysical order…personality death stories intersecting with poesy home memory reflections. You begin with a place and an action and let it carry in every direction till the words are vibrating on the page, dripping in thick robust delapidated[sic] barnhouses of adjectives and pronouns…no time for the subtle gray faced calculations of a PERFORMED intimacy…go…but remember what Kerouac forgot: revision is spontaneous also. a brief coming back to america introduction, stories about soldiers, prositutes[sic], innocent students rendered featherless by dark rivets of experience and the decadence of human pursuits in every vein…and then there’s the veins…follow ‘em. Cut your wrist let it bleed onto the paper in unique soulpatterns of mindthoughts.”
Aug 22, 2008 - 1:06 pm 7. Kazinski:Can we give it rest? Beauchamp is a young guy that lied/misremembered/told the truth about some pretty innocuous things. He served honorably as far as we know and he deserves to be able to get on with his life. If he needs to rehabilitate himself to get on with his journalistic career let him. We won, the war is over.
It is an enormous emotional burden to have to justify yourself for things you may have told people when you were 22. Its bad enough to get caught in an untruth and I shouldn’t have to rehash the fact that I didn’t actually screw Morgan Fairchild at every other Thanksgiving until I’m 80.
Aug 22, 2008 - 1:08 pm 8. Mike K:Maybe he should marry Elspeth and take her name. That sort of goes with his crowd, doesn’t it?
Aug 22, 2008 - 1:13 pm 9. JM Hanes:Hard to believe that Ackerman may actually end up making the New Republic look good!
Aug 22, 2008 - 1:16 pm 10. redc1c4:“Can we give it rest? Beauchamp is a young guy that lied/misremembered/told the truth about some pretty innocuous things. He served honorably as far as we know and he deserves to be able to get on with his life. If he needs to rehabilitate himself to get on with his journalistic career let him. We won, the war is over.”
Scott lied in public, slandering the Soldiers he served with, and in doing so, gave aid & comfort to the enemy. earning the Blue Falcon means that it hangs around your neck forever. there is nothing “honorable” in his service. he was AWOL more than once, and endangered all Allied personnel in country and elsewhere with his lies. i have no problem with him being hounded to the end of his days, as well he should.
Aug 22, 2008 - 1:26 pm 11. Tom Bowers:I do not doubt the troops have done worse since they have been there. The war is lost and it is time we stop the military industrial complex welfare. It is time we stop allowing our troops to die for Israel. It is time to admit we lost and just leave Iraq and Afghansitan.
Aug 22, 2008 - 1:49 pm 12. William Amos:ah hem can I get a little credit for breaking this ?
http://williamamos.wordpress.com/2008/08/21/the-baghdad-diarist-returns/
Aug 22, 2008 - 1:58 pm 13. gbnyc:“Why in heaven name did Scott Thomas Beauchamp agree to this interview? It does him no good whatsoever.”
In light of his sterling judgments thus far displayed? Yeah, that’s a real mystery.
Aug 22, 2008 - 2:14 pm 14. Nomenklatura:One thing this proves is that there’s always another journalist and another media publication willing to fall for a story like this, if it’s anti-war enough.
Aug 22, 2008 - 2:36 pm 15. SDN:“Die for Israel”?
Let me guess: Stormfront, or the Ron Paul campaign?
Aug 22, 2008 - 2:47 pm 16. Lying asshole “Shock Troops” Author back in the news – Political Byline:[...] Via Pajamas Media: [...]
Aug 22, 2008 - 2:54 pm 17. Letalis Maximus, Esq.:redc1c4:
I suspect most people were willing to give it a rest. Until he came back to the States and starting flapping his gums again. Giving an interview like the one he did makes him fair game. Fair game, indeed.
Aug 22, 2008 - 2:55 pm 18. Mitch:See you in hell, Scott.
Aug 22, 2008 - 3:04 pm 19. KeithNolan:Mr. Owens, there is some important information about Beauchamp’s unit at John Cole’s “balloon-juice” website. Unfortunately, the site appears to be down at the moment.
From memory, Cole recently posted an article about members of Beauchamp’s company being court-martialled for murdering an unarmed Iraqi.
I think the gist of the article was that if some of Beauchamp’s comrades were guilty of murdering a human, it wasn’t really so far-fetched to believe that they might have also run over a dog or two in their time, whatever self-serving statements unit members made to the CID about Beauchamp’s articles.
It’s fairly obvious that the Beauchamp incident is not as cut-and-dried as it appears on right-wing websites. I apologize for lack of details at this point, but will keep checking Cole’s site, and try to provide a link to the article in question when it becomes available again.
Thanks,
Aug 22, 2008 - 3:11 pm 20. KeithNolan:Keith Nolan
Oops, my mistake. Just realized that your article ALREADY referenced the execution of prisoners…. though you certainly have a different take than army veteran John Cole!
Best,
Aug 22, 2008 - 3:13 pm 21. Fen:Keith Nolan
“Beauchamp is a young guy that lied/misremembered/told the truth about some pretty innocuous things”
Innocuous? Beauchamp falsely accused his brothers of war crimes, to further his future career [waves to John Kerry]. He’ll be lucky if he’s not left tarred and feathered in the public sqaure.
Aug 22, 2008 - 3:21 pm 22. Jim C:Mr. Bowers,
I really hope that that little bit of idiocy you just spewed all over the computer screen was meant to be sarcasm. Because, if it wasn’t, you just proved yourself to be the most uninformed jackass on the face of the earth.
Jim C
Aug 22, 2008 - 3:40 pm 23. Tom W.:“Die for Israel”?
Let me guess: Stormfront, or the Ron Paul campaign?
Click his name. He sells silencers and magazines for guns, and he’s obsessed with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.
Some people are so generic that they may as well be factory produced.
It’s like you can go to Wal-Mart and pick up a Tom Bowers in the “Anti-Semitic Paranoid Government-Hating Gun Nut” aisle.
Aug 22, 2008 - 3:45 pm 24. defendusa:Buddy fukker, indeed. That SFB was given plenty of chances to come clean and take his licks. He did neither and deserves anything coming to him…Hey Gawker…B5 already gave you credit!!
Aug 22, 2008 - 3:52 pm 25. Thinking Right » Blog Archive » Beauchamp’s Back:[...] Owens of Confederate Yankee has a great take downof Ackerman’s interview over at Pajamas media. Needless to say, he’s not at all [...]
Aug 22, 2008 - 4:01 pm 26. Kevin R.C. O'Brien:I mean, the New Republic rejected this guy. The same outfit that still employs Eve Fairbanks, who’s easily his peer in the fabrication department.
The same outfit that had entirely artificial companies sail past their vaunted “fact checkers” like Beauchump’s bimbo in Steve Glass days.
The same outfit that let factual fabrications sail past them in just about every one of Ruth Shalit’s articles.
The same outfit that carried water for the USSR until the black day, from their point of view, that freedom broke out in Eastern Europe (not one, but at least two prior editors were on the Russian payroll, which surely assisted them in forming their opinions). This is an outfit steeped in treason.
Do we ever hear a peep out of them, except when they get caught making stuff up every couple of years?
Remember, when Beauchamp’s fables were exposed, TNR’s Frank Foer [i]didn’t[/i] retract them. He doubled down… until a transcript of his own conversation with Beauchamp was leaked, revealing that Foer had been lying about the support for Beauchamp’s tales. Foer was as big a liar in this as Beauchamp. And like Eve Fairbanks, he’s still there. Shalit and Glass must feel pretty burnt.
Aug 22, 2008 - 4:11 pm 27. Chuck Pelto:TO: All
RE: Sounds Like…
…Beauchamp needs more money in order to make ‘ends meet’.
Hence his ‘return’. Needs another 15-minutes in the spot-light.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
Aug 22, 2008 - 4:19 pm 28. Friday Musings | Neptunus Lex:[...] of compulsive behavior, guess who’s back? In “Notes on a Scandal,” Ackerman interviews Scott Beauchamp and Elspeth Reeve — and no one [...]
Aug 22, 2008 - 4:43 pm 29. This ain’t Hell, but you can see it from here » Blog Archive » Beauchamp lives:[...] on a Scandal“. I’d take the time to slice it up, but Bob Owens did such a fine job at Pajamas Media did such a fine job ahead of me. In “Notes on a Scandal,” Ackerman interviews Scott Beauchamp [...]
Aug 22, 2008 - 5:38 pm 30. scott thomas:Actually William Amos, by your logic shouldn’t Gawker get credit for breaking this since your article links to them?
Aug 22, 2008 - 7:12 pm 31. Kilo:FFS has there ever been a more pointless controversy about Iraq ? Who cares whether he told the truth or lied ? He did so when talking about running over stray dogs and being an idiot with piece of bone.
Who the hell cares whether it’s the truth or a lie and why ? These aren’t crimes, unlike every other fkn controversial conduct by troops that got publicity which has been.
How outrageous to say troops ran over the same dogs you can watch being used for m203 target practice in online videos. How could he say that ?
How slanderous to claim that troops may have mometarily tossed a piece of human remains at each other in jest which we can imagine looked something like those you can find troops posing with in happy snaps online.
You are simply on drugs or otherwise detached from reality if you think this is an outrageous claim about what will occur within a huge pool of diverse alpha-males do when bored out of their skulls in a combat zone. You may as well claim they don’t kill anyone either, it’s that self-deceiving.
Sure, we know that this pool of troops is diverse enough to produce someone willing to kill a whole family just so they can rape their teenage daughter, but running over dogs ? C’mon that’s just crazy!
Have a long hard fkn look at yourself if you’re not only willing to pretend to be outraged by these claims (which you are not willing to truthfully state are anything but believable), but are willing to work yourself up into a state where you are saying that it’s puzzling/regrettable that this guy — who’s commanders stand behind him as a dedicated, capable soldier — hasn’t yet been killed yet for stating them.
Can I find you guys expressing similar sentiments for other servicemen in a war zone for a different, inconsequential account of a prank that occurred years ago, or is it just this one instance when you complete lost your fkn minds ?
Aug 22, 2008 - 8:13 pm 32. arhooley:When I saw the headline, I thought Scott was publishing again. Instead, it turns out he’s merely haunting bars with his wife, his one fragile and dubious connection to legitimacy, and pouring out his story to whatever sucker will buy it.
He will try to make it in Hollywood, but he will find it more cruel and arbitrary in its treatment of “talent” than the Aztec gods. Sic transit gloria mundi.
Aug 22, 2008 - 8:24 pm 33. Xanthippas:I’m glad to see you right wing nutjobs will get another opportunity to impugn the character of a man who served his country in Iraq. “The troops” aren’t anything but props to you people in your little political psycho-dramas, but I don’t know why you want to go make it so obvious to everyone.
Aug 22, 2008 - 8:50 pm 34. Xanthippas:Fair game indeed…for clowns with too much internet and not enough common sense to write over-dramatic comments on a blog. I suspect that someone like Beauchamp would be able to handle jokers like you with ease, in print or otherwise.
Aug 22, 2008 - 8:55 pm 35. Xanthippas:his one fragile and dubious connection to legitimacy
Well, that and that little thing about him serving his country.
Aug 22, 2008 - 8:57 pm 36. Amos:Shut up, idiot. He defamed and insulted his comrades, he is a fool and a liar. Screw him and you.
Aug 22, 2008 - 9:38 pm 37. Peter:Sorry, Xanthippas, there have been more that a few folks who put on Uncle’s suit for self serving reasons.
Aug 22, 2008 - 11:12 pm 38. Robohobo:Many of the people complaing about this Beauchamp clown have worn Uncle’s suit in this, or previous wars. So I didn’t serve in this war, seems the Corps no longer needs 61 year old Corporals. Doesn’t mean I can’t recognise the type, though. The last one you clowns got so excited about was John Kerry. When IS he going to release those records?
Xanthippas wrote:
POT.KETTLE.BLACK I think.
Aug 22, 2008 - 11:16 pm 39. Warren Street:And yet, those of us who have been in the military know Beauchamp was telling the truth.
Despite every attempt to marshal the “memos” and use the phony-assed argument of “whistleblower” protection, everyone who has actual, you know, experience with the military understands that a troop will say and do anything once his Company commander brings the hurt.
Civilians, and wingnuts in particular, do not understand what it is like to be pressured by your chain of command to recant, rewrite, or just plain change your story. You don’t have any rights, you don’t get a lawyer who is worth a damn, you don’t get any support (unless you’re lucky enough to have a squad leader and platoon sergeant who believe the commander is wrong and will stand up to him before the battalion commander), and you don’t get to sit there and say whatever you want to say. If you’ve lived a soft life of doing whatever you want without repurcussion, you cannot conceive of being subjected to a Company commander and the UCMJ. They really can give you all sorts of punishment that can rock your world.
Beauchamp is likely guilty of embellishing, of stretching the truth, or just plain being a shitbag. But it’s not a stretch to say that the kid spent a good chunk of his time being told what his Company commander would/could/was gonna to do him if he didn’t write those sworn statements.
Aug 23, 2008 - 4:01 am 40. Tom W.:And yet, those of us who have been in the military know Beauchamp was telling the truth.
That’s why there was no evidence whatsoever of women with melted faces, run-over dogs, scavenging children shot by U.S. troops, or chaplains handing out Bibles.
Maybe he was telling Truth, not truth, so that let him, like, make crap up.
In the name of Truth, you know.
Aug 23, 2008 - 4:32 am 41. Tom W.:Fair game indeed… for clowns with too much internet and not enough common sense to write over-dramatic comments on a blog.
People don’t have enough common sense to write over-dramatic comments on a blog? What does that even mena?
I suspect that someone like Beauchamp would be able to handle jokers like you with ease, in print or otherwise.
Why do leftists instantly resort to physical threats? Even if Beauchamp pulled out one of his wrenches from the motor pool and beat everyone here to death, he’d still be a dishonorable fabulist who’s a horrible writer.
The ability to knock people’s heads in doesn’t prove anything except that you can knock people’s heads in. Gorillas can, too. Big deal.
If he was telling the truth, he wouldn’t resort to physical violence, unless he’s also a psychopath.
Aug 23, 2008 - 4:40 am 42. Bob Owens:Warren, did you even read this article? OF course bad things happenin war… di you not see the fact I mentioned that men in his battalion are getting Article 32′d this week for murdering detainees?
Seriously…are you familiar with this case at all?
In “Shock Troops” we know the burned woman Beauchamp claims to have insulted simply never existed; I spoke to the military staff and contractors (Some of which whom had been there since 2004) at both bases in Kuwait (Arifjan and Buehring) where the story could have even possibly be true, and they a person of that description was never on base. Not just at the time Beauchamp was there, but never. Two officers there Major Russo and LTC Sands, write it off as an urban legend.
The Bradley story, where he claims a fellow soldier can whip a 35-ton tracked vehicle around like Dave Mirra doea a BMX bike, was firmly refuted by the company that designed and builds them… well that, and a common sense level understanding of how tracked vehicles work.
The only story that had a chance of panning out in “Shock Troops” was the claim about their being skull fragments being used almost like toys, but horrible writer that he is, Beauchamp has to turn that up to “11,” and have the jokster wear rotting skull and flesh on his head through the heat of the day into the night, which is highly implausible to all but the most gullible.
And then, of course, there are his two previous stories “War Bonds” and “Dead of Night.”
Beauchamp’s exaggerations were more subtle in both of these stories, but no less real.
In “War Bonds” Beauchamp claims to meet an IRaqi boy while pulling security for a vehicle having it’s tire changed. Officers in Iraq tell me that is impossible; doing so would create a perfect ambush situation, and SOP would be to immediately rig a tow. That, and the not so minor detail that HMMWVs have run-flat tires.
In “Dead of Night” Beauchamp claims to find a unique sqaure-backed pistol cartridge fired only by Glock pistols, and then claims that since Glocks are only carried by Iraqi police, that it proves the man they found was executed by Iraqi police.
But Glocks fire the 9mm NATO round the most common centerfire pistol cartridge on Planet Earth, and square-backed cartridges simply don’t exist.
CSI Beauchamp is also dead wrong about the distribution of Glocks; they are a huge status symbol weapon in Iraqi culture, carried by security force and civilians, men and women, young and old.
Scott Beauchamp heard stories–urban legends of the “no shit, there I was…” variety that have been part of military culture longer than we’ve had an English language to communicate in, personalized them, and forwarded them on to his factchecker wife, who dutifully pass them on to here editors, who ran the stories with no other vetting.
Dogs get run over. Gallows humor is common. Soldiers do grotesque things to mentally cope with absurdly unfair pressure-cooker situations, and men crack. But that isn’t what Scott Beauchamp wrote. What he wrote was fiction so bad civilians were among the first to find the errors and improbabilities, which active duty and retired soldiers quickly backed up.
Beauchamp told something somewhat like truth, but it was still all easily debunked fiction.
Aug 23, 2008 - 6:23 am 43. The Return of Beauchamp « LGF II: Charles and Killgore Free Footballs:[...] The Return of Beauchamp August 23, 2008 — Rodan Fantasist Scott Beauchamp is back, sort of, with a fawning interview in Radar Online. Bob Owens has a post at PJ Media reminding us of a few facts: Infamous ‘Shock Troops’ Author Back in the News. [...]
Aug 23, 2008 - 6:31 am 44. Susan Katz Keating:It looks to me as if Beauchamp was trying to establish a career for himself as this generation’s cutting edge eyewitness to war (in the tradition of Michael Herr, et al). He did it at the expense of his fellow soldiers. Glad he got caught.
Aug 23, 2008 - 7:56 am 45. SFC Cheryl McElroy US ARMY (RET):Warren Street:
Newsflash, sweetpea: I was in the US ARMY for 30 years, and no one I ever came into contact with was forced or coerced into lying on a sworn statement.
Beauchamp knew the jig was up and he could get into serious trouble for writing the same shit on a affidavit as he did in the New Republic.
He lied, slandered, libeled, and denigrated his fellow Soldiers in a national publication, with fabricated horseshit masquerading a ‘war stories’. Members of his unit, including the ones he tried to drag into his ‘memoirs’, have flatly denied his statements.
He brought shame on himself and undue stress that his unit did not need. He’s a narcissistic, delusional, problem child, who should be kicked out for the good of the Army.
Try your excuses on someone who doesn’t know any better.
“Wingnuts” indeed. STFU.
Aug 23, 2008 - 11:12 am 46. The Last Gasp of The New Republic’s “Man in Iraq” « The Foxhole:[...] More at Pajamas Media: http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/infamous-shock-troops-author-back-in-the-news/2/ [...]
Aug 23, 2008 - 11:30 am 47. Big Country:SFC Cheryl: Bravo! You sound like the kind of NCO I’d follow in a heartbeat
Big Country SP4(Permanant) Med Ret.
Aug 23, 2008 - 3:57 pm 48. Steve:Isn’t it odd that the left is now crying “he served his country!”. Seems the only time liberals support the troops are when they’re stabbing their fellow troops in the back.
Aug 23, 2008 - 4:50 pm 49. whiskey:What stands out among Beauchamp’s career is that he very often was a jerk: romancing two women at a time, using each one, lying about his “war stories” to pump himself up as the next Norman Mailer or whatever for Liberals, and so on.
It’s interesting to see his jerkiness *attract* women — the more lies and deceptions he got into (including plenty in his personal life) the more women were attracted to him. Fascinating.
Aug 24, 2008 - 12:04 am 50. Warren Street:SFC McElroy, you served in a “peace time” Army. Were you in Vietnam? Korea? How many tours did you do in Iraq or Afghanistan?
Bob: You have a comprehensive database of all events that have happened in Iraq since the invasion of 2003?
Your inability to find “proof” that anecdotal events actually happened isn’t “proof” that they didn’t happen.
What is true is that the right wing is so desperate to prove Beauchamp wrong that it focuses on the embellished details in what is probably a flawed but essentially true story. Spend any time reading the accounts of ten people who were in the same place at the same time and you’ll find enough to tear any “account” of the event to pieces.
I actually believe that Beauchamp is a liar, but a liar who gleaned a bit of truth out of his experiences. What I would like to hear is the non-bullshit enhanced version that he couldn’t get Franklin Foer to run with. I’d like to hear what he has to say that isn’t run through a Spencer Ackerman filter as well.
Unfortunately, the past transgressions of a lot of the people involved in this story kind of leave it with a bit of a sickening aftertaste. Somewhere in what Beauchamp wrote is a version of the truth–I just don’t think he created all of the details out of thin air.
Aug 24, 2008 - 12:42 pm 51. Warren Street:Newsflash, sweetpea: I was in the US ARMY for 30 years, and no one I ever came into contact with was forced or coerced into lying on a sworn statement.
Then you never served in a combat arms unit, nor did you ever do your job as an NCO, nor did you serve in the Army the rest of us had to serve in, where a lying, cheating chain of command is common. In just a few years in the Army, I saw at least five company commanders relieved over lying, intimidating soldiers into lying about how they were treated when they asked to speak to the post Inspector General, falsifying claims on Article 32 hearings for missing sensitive items, lying to the battalion commander about readiness and training statistics, lying to soldiers about to be deployed who refused to deploy without adequate gear, and one incident where a company commander twice tried to intimidate a PFC into not filing an IG claim against the unit for screwing him out of BAH and BAS–the company commander had to be told, both times, to back off the soldier and not force him to accept denied those benefits.
No doubt, SFC McElroy was one of those NCOs who wasn’t party to anything significant going on in her unit. Otherwise, had she ever led troops and done her job, she would have endless stories of butting heads with the 1SG, the Commander, the Battalion S-3, etc., over issues with troops.
Those battles are the way the Army works–everyone has an agenda, and everyone fights for their agenda. And troops get caught in the middle and are told to shut up, sign things, and keep themselves well within their lane.
You were likely the Commander’s go-to NCO for making sure things were just the way he wanted it.
You served in these units:
Duty assignments included: 1st Armored Division, 1st Cavalry Division, 3rd COSCOM, EUCOM, 101st Airborne.
And you never heard of a troop being told to sign something or lie?
You’re the liar. Damn, you sure are.
Aug 24, 2008 - 12:54 pm 52. Warren Street:It looks to me as if Beauchamp was trying to establish a career for himself as this generation’s cutting edge eyewitness to war
I agree–best way to do that would be to tell the truth.
I agree with Bob–he didn’t tell the truth about everything in his piece, while some of it could be true.
Would I have printed it? Nope.
Do I think the wingnuts have a case though? Uh, probably a little.
The problem is, this is a war like all the others, with all of the other horrible shit that goes on, and trying to paint it as some noble, perfect struggle with nothing but perfect troops who are smeared by evil liberals is patently fucking ridiculous.
Aug 24, 2008 - 1:28 pm 53. Javelin:Wow, dead dogs, real scandal here. Where were all those WMD’s?
Aug 24, 2008 - 6:41 pm 54. SFC Cheryl McElroy US ARMY (RET):Warren,
You asshat. If you read the bio as closely as you should have, you’ve had known that I was with the 1st Armored in Desert Storm and 101st Airborne in OIF. I was in Iraq TWICE in combat zones. Not exactly a peacetime Army. I jumped forward contantly with FOBs and mobile TOCs to gather and disseminate intel to subordinate units.
Don’t even try to impune my service or integrity.
I butted heads plenty.
You can go back to playing with yourself, now.
Aug 25, 2008 - 4:30 am 55. SFC Cheryl McElroy US ARMY (RET):Javelin,
Like warren, your cognitve reading skills are lacking:
In case you didn’t know, we found a substantial amount of hidden WMD along with documents and recordings in which Saddam Hussein emphatically stated his intention to continue WMD development and deception.
1) Declassified NGIC report:
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf
2) 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3872201.stm
3) 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons agents:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html
4) Chemical warheads containing cyclosarin:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/07/02/international1018EDT0516.DTL
and: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,124576,00.html
5) Over 1,000 radioactive materials in powdered form meant for dispersal over populated areas:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3872201.stm
6) Roadside bombs loaded with mustard and “conventional” sarin gas, assembled in binary chemical projectiles for maximum potency: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html
Those weapons were previously unknown to U.N. inspectors.
Oh yeah, and his terrorist connections:
He gave thousands of dollars to families of suicide bombers and in addition, Iraqi intelligence met with al Qadea operatives and provided with training camps in Northern Iraq:
The Mother of All Connections
From the July 18, 2005 issue: A special report on the new evidence of collaboration between Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and al Qaeda.
by Stephen F. Hayes & Thomas Joscelyn
07/18/2005, Volume 010, Issue 41
Source:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/005/804yqqnr.asp?pg=1
Saddam Hussein, as evidenced by the WMD found, his previous use, continued willingness to use them, and the documents discovered which connected him to terrorists, was a threat. The fact remains that the inspectors got absolutely nowhere with regard to full disclosure of Hussein’s WMD program.
I’m an Iraq War vet, and I’m damned glad we not only invaded, but took out the sonofabitch and got those WMDs before anyone had the chance to use them. Had I the power, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran (for starters) would have been asphalt parking lots on 12 September 2001. But, I’m a former Soldier, not a diplomat.
Aug 25, 2008 - 4:34 am 56. SFC Cheryl McElroy US ARMY (RET):Hussein wasn’t the only threat. Just one of them. But, not anymore, is he?
Oh yeah, one more thing Warren:
I personnally witnessed several Article 32s during my tenure in the 101st alone, and there were serious consequences, professionally, and financially for those involved. Some things have changed since your tour in ‘Nam, which was probably spent in a drug-induced haze. See? I can make assumptons, too. As for butting heads: In my early days, I was busted from SPC to PFC for insubordination. There’s a difference between my continued service and Beauchamp. I grew up. The military, across the board, has problems like any other segment of society, but by and large, the penalties for infractions, some of which would be considered minor in the civilian sector, are much worse.
Problems concerning Article 32s aside, If you admire the likes of a lying-agenda driven problem child like Beauchamp, that tells us all we need to know about your character.
Liar.
Aug 25, 2008 - 4:45 am 57. SFC Cheryl McElroy US ARMY (RET):“Big Country:
SFC Cheryl: Bravo! You sound like the kind of NCO I’d follow in a heartbeat.
Big Country SP4(Permanant) Med Ret.
Aug 23, 2008 – 3:57 pm”
Thanks, Big Country! I had the reputation of telling people what they needed, rather then wanted, to hear. That got me in trouble more times than I can remember. We all make mistakes. I made plenty in my career, and paid for each one. I was certainly was no angel, and I’m not getting a halo anytime soon. Those of us who served know all about the “RHIP” standard, but NCOs like me were tough but fair. When applicable, I gave the same breaks to my troops that I know were given to people of higher rank. Example: The worst kept secret on Ft. Campbell was a 2 star general with MULTIPLE DUIs ON POST. He ended up being a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Pentagon. My Chain of Command usually took things like that into consideration on a case-by-case basis. If we had a Soldier that was a consistant screw-up with a shitty work ethic and attitude, they weren’t given the same consideration as one who was generally squared away.
Beauchamp is an attention whore with a beef against authority. He’s in the wrong profession.
Aug 25, 2008 - 5:42 am 58. RockThrowingPeasant:No doubt, SFC McElroy was one of those NCOs who wasn’t party to anything significant going on in her unit. Otherwise, had she ever led troops and done her job, she would have endless stories of butting heads with the 1SG, the Commander, the Battalion S-3, etc., over issues with troops.
So, you are willing to smear someone you don’t know to defend an admitted fabulist? Your “salty” view of the military seems as real as Beauchamps. I served as well and found a far different experience. So, we have at least two who served for more than “a few years” (your claim) and had a different take on the military and the chain of command.
But maybe you’re right. Maybe the company commanders do coerce testimony. You certainly post about a number of CCs who were relieved because of dishonorable activity. And, yet, in this case, it was so incredibly effective that no proof exists at all. Really ineffective around you, yet incredibly effective everywhere else.
Personally? I think a person who has such a jaded view after only a few years was probably a slug who caught heat constantly and despised the soldiers who could hack it without whining.
Aug 25, 2008 - 7:06 am 59. D. DeMatha:Hey all,
A few things. Warren is your typical moron lib. When a troop lies, you light his ass up. That Boachamp went out and lied in public and got himself lit up, all the better. STFU, he needs the stockade.
SFC “McElroy” you are another species of animal altogether.
Drop the act, honey. I am a retired MSG and the way you carry yourself is a disgrace. I did 24 on active duty and I am now retired and working in IT for a private company. You need to get yourself some distance from your “heroic” service and get back to basics. Or a *job.*
You got busted from SPC to PFC? Big deal. Why bring that up? Your “duty assignments” were the Old Ironsides and the 101st? No, your duty assignments were Germany and Ft. Campbell, ate up.
You were in Desert Storm? Excellent. Being female, your ass was *support* and you know it. Unless you were manning the .50 and feeding the rounds in yourself, STFU. I spent enough time watching support NCOs like yourself talk serious smack about sh*t that they know nothing about to know a POS like you when I see one. Don’t think I don’t remember being told I couldn’t say anything about POS’s like yourself. Those days are over. I will speak freely now, if you don’t mind.
Most ate up officer in the Army? Company commander. I was a 1SG for two years, and I went through three of them. Each and every doggone one thought he was “God Almighty” and could tell a troop to sign sh*t with a word, never mind if it was “Legal” or not. YES they would tell a troop to sign things that were demonstrably wrong. YES I fought it and won. It’s called being an NCO. If you didn’t see that, you weren’t an NCO or you couldn’t hang as an NCO.
I will not defend sh*tbag libs, but I ain’t got the stomach to be in agreement with a sh*tbag SFC who did thirty and didn’t pin on MSG. You must have been the most hardcore 71L in the whole shooting match over there. STFU, REMF. I wonder if we crossed paths. You were probably the one with the big ass.
Aug 25, 2008 - 9:11 am 60. Mordrach:Warren Street sleeps with farm animals. He particularly likes sheep.
What? You’re saying you don’t, Warren?
Well, prove it didn’t happen, Warren. I’m waiting…
Aug 25, 2008 - 2:54 pm 61. James:SFC Cheryl McElroy US ARMY (RET):
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf
Excerpts from the link:
recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degrade mustard or sarin nerve agents
pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are “assessed” to still exist
pre-Guf War munitions “could” be sold on theblack market
The “possibility” of use outside Iraq cannotbe ruled out
The “most likely”….
It has been reported………
Blah, blah, blah-
All supposition. Nothing concrete here. (old stuff. I wonder how much would be found in this country)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3872201.stm
OK, we found some radiocative material from a research facility. I’m not impressed. How much radioactive medical waste do you think is disposed in this country every year?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html
U.S. troops raiding a warehouse in the northern city of Mosul uncovered a suspected chemical weapons factory containing 1,500 gallons of chemicals believed destined for attacks on U.S. and Iraqi forces and civilians, military officials said Saturday.
Jeez- I have chlorine bleach and Draino in my house. That can be used as a chemical weapon also.
Oh wow, look at this:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/07/02/international1018EDT0516.DTL
The article or page you requested was not found.
And this:
htmlhttp://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,124576,00.html
You’ve requested a FOXNews.com page that cannot be found.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3872201.stm
Didn’t you already post that??????????
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html – finally, a story with some substance: The Iraqi Survey Group confirmed today that a 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found.
Troops have been ordered to falsify statements to cover a commanders’ fourth-point-of-contact for ages. Don’t act like it doesn’t occur.
Aug 25, 2008 - 5:31 pm 62. Big Country:You need to get your ducks in order before you start blowing a lot of smoke like a dirty rotten-a$$ed leg. If you can’t, you’re no better than that punk Beauchamp.
SFC Cheryl: “The worst kept secret on Ft. Campbell was a 2 star general with MULTIPLE DUIs ON POST.” OH Hell Yeah.. “Big John” Gen. Keene!!! I was there when he was CG… 3BDE 187th RCT… yeah a Rakkasan back then… I was there when he got caught at the gate one night… word was all over post by the next day. I ended up being ‘no angel’ myself (3 field grades) Thats why the SP4 ended up being a “P” for permanant LOL! I wasn’t a dirtbag, but I enjoyed one too many a bar fight when it was the ‘kinder gentler army’ and that wasn’t allowable but I did my time and can respect someone who did… Never could keep them stripes!!!
As far as D. Dematha: you seem to really enjoy railing on people who you view as a REMF… Checking DOD records I didn’t find any “D. DeMatha” listed in ANY database… Strange… So either thats just your handle or yer as fulla crap as you accuse others of being. Charlie Friggin Hardcore talking shmack?
Well now, I agree that Beauchump is a POS, but at least he’s honest about at least serving. Thats about it tho…
And BTW: I’m the guy who help bust Beauchamp out to Bob here in Kuwait regarding his fantasies on the Contractor Female with the Melted Face… I’ve been here in the Middle East since 2003 and I also assist in the Project busting bogus special ops wannabes… I’ve got MY BT-DT-GTTS like you read about… hell… I got more trigger time in Iraq as a civilian than as an actuive duty soldier, to include Desert Storm. My bonafides have been proven. So do us all a favor there ‘Chairborne’… why don’t You STFD and STFU?
Aug 25, 2008 - 5:48 pm 63. trailing wife:Golly, I’m glad no one will contradict me when I say I’m just a little civilian housewife from the Midwestern suburbs!
Aug 27, 2008 - 8:20 pm