« Previous · Home · Next »
Scott Thomas Exposed
By John
The New Republic just posted a note from the mystery man himself:
My Diarist, "Shock Troops," and the two other pieces I wrote for the New Republic have stirred more controversy than I could ever have anticipated. They were written under a pseudonym, because I wanted to write honestly about my experiences, without fear of reprisal. Unfortunately, my pseudonym has caused confusion. And there seems to be one major way in which I can clarify the debate over my pieces: I'm willing to stand by the entirety of my articles for The New Republic using my real name.I am Private Scott Thomas Beauchamp, a member of Alpha Company, 1/18 Infantry, Second Brigade Combat Team, First Infantry Division.
My pieces were always intended to provide my discreet view of the war; they were never intended as a reflection of the entire U.S. Military. I wanted Americans to have one soldier's view of events in Iraq.
It's been maddening, to say the least, to see the plausibility of events that I witnessed questioned by people who have never served in Iraq. I was initially reluctant to take the time out of my already insane schedule fighting an actual war in order to play some role in an ideological battle that I never wanted to join. That being said, my character, my experiences, and those of my comrades in arms have been called into question, and I believe that it is important to stand by my writing under my real name.
--Private Scott Thomas Beauchamp
Private Beauchamp has just placed himself in an unenviable 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' scenario. If his stories are true, he'll be facing the business end of the UCMJ. If false, he'll be exposed as a fraud and a liar, and will have destroyed that budding writing career that he so confidently promised.
So we know he's a soldier. I never doubted that in the first place, he spoke the lingo well enough. But, as Greyhawk noted, the inquiry has really just begun. Now we have to go about fact-checking his stories, which I suspect will turn out to have been grandly embellished.
So no doubt wheels are turning over in the 1/18's command staff right now. Wouldn't be surprised if Private Beauchamp was standing tall in front of the man at this very moment, under the scruntity of an aggressively curious CO who is demanding details down to the letter about each of his diary entries.
Expect a press release soon. The Army is going to move quick on this, now that they have a face to the name.
Either way, today is going to be a very bad day for Private Scott Thomas Beauchamp.
As a final thought, I think Uncle Jimbo deserves a fair share of credit here. In this post at Blackfive, Jimbo tore into Beauchamp with the precision of a trained pyschologist, nailing him as a primadonna who brilliance is always unappreciated by the buffons around him.
And Jimbo's statement: Every unit has a Scott Thomas, the whiny pissant whose brilliance is never recognized and who is always being abused by the chain of command for stuff that's not his fault." ...is certainly validated by this email from Michelle Malkin's blog:
I’m active Army & an Iraq vet.I just pulled up “Scott Thomas Beauchamp” on the secure “Army Knowledge Online” website. It lists his current rank as “PV2″. (That data is kept accurate via pay records on that website.)
In his Sep 06 blog post he listed his rank as “Private First Class”. That indicates that without a doubt he was busted at least one rank as part of Article 15 proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and he likely has a strong ax to grind with his chain of command.
Here's the thing about milbloggers. We're usually right about this stuff.
Update: Matthew Yglesias at The Atlantic misses the point:
Well, now here he is -- his real name is Scott Thomas Beauchamp, he's a soldier, and as best I can tell nobody has yet brought forward any serious reason to doubt his story. Needless to say, rather than spend some time reflecting on the fact-free zone the conservative press is trying to create, Jonah Goldberg is attacking Beauchamp while Mark Steyn argues that Jonah isn't attacking him viciously enough.That's just crazy. All these people need to stop. They need to take a deep breath. They need to apologize to the people at TNR who've wasted huge amounts of time dealing with their nonsense. And they need to think a bit about the epistemic situation they're creating where information about Iraq that they don't want to hear -- even when published in a pro-war publication -- can just be immediately dismissed as fraudulent even though the misconduct it described was far, far less severe than all sorts of other well-document misconduct in Iraq.
It was never about whether or not Thomas was a soldier. Most of us were "nearly certain" he was. It was the stories that smelled, not Thomas' identity. And those stories still need to be verified. This is the same way that the AP skated on Jamil Hussein, they were able to shift the debate away from Hussein's reports and onto whether or not he was an Iraqi police officer.
Update 2: Scott Johnson at Powerline writes:
In their preface to Beauchamp's statement, "the editors" state that they have thus far found nothing to disprove Beauchamp's article. They do not add, as they did earlier, that they have communicated with soldiers who have done much to corroborate the events recounted by Beauchamp. Indeed, neither Beauchamp nor "the editors" have disclosed a single fact to corroborate the article, although the disclosure of Beauchamp's identity counts for something. I trust that all will become clear in the fullness of time.
Right. It's on TNR to present the facts, not the blogosphere. Simply "finding nothing" to disprove the stories isn't good enough. They ran the story by a -then- anonymous source, a decision that places the burden of proof directly on TNR's shoulders.
Also covering:
Dean Barnett
Michelle Malkin
Small Wars Journal
Mudville Gazette
Gateway Pundit
Qando
Hot Air
Castle Argghhh
Powerline
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://op-for.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1122
Comments
Yeah, I was wondering about that. Whoever pulled his record up on AKO is probably going to get yelled at, but I think his analysis is spot on.
I'd really, really love to hear what these two:
http://www.1-18in.2bct.1id.army.mil/alpha.htm
Have to say about PVT Beauchamp.
Wondering when:
1. This young private will be fully embraced by the MoveOn crowd replete with offers of support for his anticipated crucifixion. Or how soon he heads to Canada while on his mid-tour leave.
2. TNR legally distances itself - should anyone caricatured in his stories feel up to suing for libel.
John,
The only writing career of Beauchamp's that may be finished is that of a non-fiction writer. Even Stephen Glass got to write a novel semi based on his time at TNR.
TNR still has explaining to do, to the readers of the magazine. I have been a subscriber off and on since 1980. The magazine at the moment is sadly hurting in the trust department.
I linked into your post.
Cheers,
Bill
I can't believe I'm going to be the first to say this, but this punk really IS a Big, Red One..."
I do think Beauchamp deserves a little bit of credit for at least manning up to public scrutiny. He could have taken the easy way out and refused to go public, claiming he feared professional or physical retaliation. TNR would have loved that, giving them a 1st Amendment Crusade to rally around. Instead PV2 Beauchamp is knowingly putting himself out in the open where he’s got to know he going to catch crap from pro-mil, his unit and absolutely from his superiors. Can’t say yet whether he’s a virtuous soul martyring himself to bring a sordid unit to light or if he’s a pompous douche bag who’s slandering good men for his own purpose. But either way he’s gonna catch hell. Can’t tell whether that’s courage, vanity or ignorance; but it does take massive stones.
As for Yglesias’ comments, TNR has a credibility problem. They lost the privilege of anonymous sources with the Glass incident. And as for his comment about “TNR who've wasted huge amounts of time dealing with their nonsense…” New Republic should have had this story vetted before they ever printed it. You don’t break a story with only an anonymous source, and then not go back and corroborate it. If it’s too much trouble for them to do their job, maybe they should stay away from edgy front line reporting and just stick to editorializing. The media, and not just the MSM, need to get off their high horse and realize they now have to be able to verify their information. There have been too many cases in recent years where they have been caught out either manufacturing stories or accepting unverified sources (Glass, Rather, etc). It’s not a matter of right/left, prowar/antiwar, conservative/liberal; it’s a matter of them doing their job.
Reading through other blogs, Beauchamp appears to discuss working for 12 hours trying go fix a leak on a fighting vehicle.
Now...
Back in the day, when I was a company commander, it was common to have a few “problem children”. The kind of soldier that gets detailed to jobs like spending 12 hours trying to fix a leak on a vehicle.
I would almost suspect that such a leak might be a normal leak, and it was an unsolvable task assigned simply to keep him occupied and out of trouble.
Thereby lending just enough credibility to his stories to make them almost unbelievable.
I also suspect that this guy has been either busted a rank or passed over for a promotion and now has a beef with the Army. Because why would the Army, in its right mind, keep such a smart articulate self-serving solder from getting promoted? {sigh}
A show of hands of all the past Platoon or Company commanders (and NCOs) who have a similar story to mine?
New Republic should have had this story vetted before they ever printed it. You don’t break a story with only an anonymous source, and then not go back and corroborate it. - Mike - July 26, 2007 10:36 AM
Straight out of the Dan Rather School of Broadcasting. "I know it to be true and I'm going to report it".
Foer called the soldier "an amazing resource -- a guy who's on the front lines, who has a gift for observation and can write."
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA----Foer thinks this guy can write??
I read his blog - I read his crap on FOERS left wing trash of a magazine.
Pvt Scott Beauchamp is a sad pathetic unimaginative wannabe Hunter Thompson, who is incapable of an original idea, and who couldn't penn a "B" script for a schlock "direct to dvd" movie.
And now we find out that Foer published Beauchamps inane ramblings because this sad excuse of a soldier is engaged to a TNR staffer, Elspeth Reeve.....oops make that the FORMER TNR staffer, Elspeth Reeve.
To paraphrase Donald Trump "She's fired"!!
And Foer accused those who questioned the veracity of this s**t "Scott" penned, of being motivated by an "idealogical" agenda!!
Big Army can hang him (and probably will). Irregardless, the damage is done.
Still, would hate to have to face the ire of his 1SG. Saw the picture of that man on the 1-18 IN website. He appears to be a soldier of little humor.
Hope that private likes moving foxholes from one point to another. Especially in the heat of an Iraqi summer and in full battle rattle.
Sounds like S.B. needs a little shrinking by the doc,then a boot!The boy clearly by his writings at(ghostsonfilm.blogspot.com)about himself is not military material..I was also wondering if there is a support page set up for the rest of the 1/18 infantry..The real soldiers in the second brigade combat team could probably use some good news and support!You all are doing a great job,you got our supprot. Semper Fi
I'll agree that this kid has enough brains to be at least a Specialist, but the common sense of a grape-nut. Definitely worthy of my finding extra duty, like cleaning and polishing the dogbone off of the '88.
And also agree... believe PV2 Beauchamp will spend the rest of his tour doing every crappy duty out there, followed by the choice of re-upping for another tour, or being stop-lossed and sent back... now that would be sweet!
Don't you think that if he was afraid of reprisal, he'd have used a better pseudonym? Whatever. Your insane hatred and bloodlust for this man who has sacrificed to serve your country is really sad.
How is making up disgusting stories (which is what I will assume he did until there's some kind of evidence backing them up) "serving his country"? It seems from what I've read about him, this guy is a total waste of space. The only thing he could serve is some french fries.
Why is it insane to hate someone who slanders his country for personal gain? The stories he told may well have never happened. Lying about others is a positive attribute now?
uh, when did fact-checking = bloodlust, Neil?
This is a milblog, y'know. Some of us even know what we're talking about!
The very best thing that the army can do, right NOW, is put a few cameras in the hands of other soldiers from the same unit, and let them film themselves at work. Then allow them to publish the results freely on the net.
I'm thinking they will offer us a very, very different perspective to 'Scott Thomas', but maybe that's just me. And I'd like to see the army's critics argue with the results.
Warren - that is a great idea, but because of its obvious merit, think the Army will take the opposite tack and shut down all non-military comms on that FOB until this private goes through the due process. There is no good idea the Army won't do its level best to avoid.
As for Neil - yep - Beauchamp should be watching his back - and likely will have monitors to ensure he doesn't suffer physical violence. Those are the breaks when others who'd placed their lives, honor, and memory in Beauchamp's hands for safekeeping see how he used them for selfish ends.
I sent the following email to Michelle Malkin's website concerning the following:
A reader who identified himself as "an Active Army & Iraq Vet" sent you the following comment:
"I just pulled up “Scott Thomas Beauchamp” on the secure “Army Knowledge Online” website. It lists his current rank as “PV2″. (That data is kept accurate via pay records on that website.)"
The "Whitepages" tool on the Army Knowledge Online website does not keep accurate data via pay records. The system is not that sophisticated, although, as a soldier, I wish it was. In fact, the information is changed by means of the user updating a profile with information similar to that which is contained in .vcf cards used in Outlook, etc. Every promotion I've been privileged to receive has required that I update my own information. In fact, to corroborate my statement I emailed the support staff at Army Knowledge Online with the following:
"Does the information contained in the WhitePages (Rank, Unit) update via our payroll information or via our online profiles which each user is responsible for changing themselves? Or is it possibly a combination of both?"
and received the this response:
"Sir, The information in white pages is updated from the user information section located within the AKO site. You can access this information by logging into the site, clicking on the "My Account" link located in the upper left section of the screen. Once you click on this link, the first section you will see will be your personal information. Changes made to this section will be reflected in the white pages."
Hopefully this clears up some of the facts surrounding “Scott Thomas Beauchamp”.
To the poster one above...
I highly recommend that you go back and relook the "My Account" link on AKO.
Rank IS NOT one of the user-modified options. In fact, it has an asterisk next to it with a note that says, "If information is incorrect, see your S-1 for assistance."
I can email you a screen shot if you like.
So... for each promotion you've ever received -- it's IMPOSSIBLE for you to update it.
All of my promotions have been automatically updated.
Beauchamp is a PV2. Get your facts straight. I also suggest you send the Malkin folks an appropriate retraction.
To the poster one above...
I highly recommend that you go back and relook the "My Account" link on AKO.
Rank IS NOT one of the user-modified options. In fact, it has an asterisk next to it with a note that says, "If information is incorrect, see your S-1 for assistance."
I can email you a screen shot if you like.
So... for each promotion you've ever received -- it's IMPOSSIBLE for you to update it.
All of my promotions have been automatically updated.
Beauchamp is a PV2. Get your facts straight. I also suggest you send the Malkin folks an appropriate retraction.
The kids about to be used, and used hard.
TNR used him to write bad things about Iraq that may or maynot be true.
People started questioning what he wrote, and rather then jump back in the shadows, and admit that people didn't want to believe things from his perspective, (Which is critical, I don't see that big a deal about any of the things he wrote) he decided to pop up and say something.
If everything he's written is true, then the army is about to whack him and his unit hard. Most importantly, they're about to whack him hard for shit he should have stopped. He should have told the nutjob with the piece of skull to knock it off. He should have said something to his buddies joking about the injured womans' scars. The dogs, he should have done something his own damn self. If everythings hes' been writing is a lie, then his command is about to whack him hard. If its all been a lie, and this is just another dork sitting in his moms basement then everyone and his mother is going to beat him up for now and all eternity.
Either way, the guy is a prima donna complex. The whole world revolves around him. His narcissism runs so deep you can't see the bottom.
Dear Neil -- this man hasn't served for his country he served HIMSELF..his self admitted SOLE intention for joining the army was to parlay it into a writing career.
Thats not service - that SELFISH...and his cowardly acts in the form of unimaginative crap that are a disservice to any one that has served out of a sense of duty loyalty and sacrifice for their country is reprehensible. But trust that some worm will crawl out of the woodwork insisting that this POS should be treated with respect and his lies, his deliberate attempts to malign and denigrade soldiers, should be overlooked Neil is under the misguided assumption that Pvt Beaushit sacrificed to serve our country.
Okay - thanks Pvt Beauchamp for your service - you pathetic lying self serving scumbag! There -- are you happy now Neil??!!
To the poster giving Private Beau credit for stepping forward.
He didn't.
He started it "anonymously" through his wife who works at New Republic. JD Johannes and a few other milbloggers have been to FOB Falcon and there is only ONE company of Bradleys based there. Not to hard to find the source when his name is Scott Thomas Beauchamp. He knew the jig was up and was probably ordered by his CO to step forward.
>> In his Sep 06 blog post he listed his rank as “Private First Class”. That indicates that without a doubt he was busted at least one rank as part of Article 15 proceedings under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and he likely has a strong ax to grind with his chain of command.
This is weak. "indicates with out a doubt" No, I have lots of doubts. What is the normal rate of promotion? When do most soldiers get promoted to SP4 or CPL from PFC? Time of service? Commendations?
That email writer to Malkin didn't know anything, and you are just repeating it.
I was reading "Band of Brothers" by Stephen Ambrose last night and Liebgott showed some guys a ring he cut from the finger of a dead German. This stuff has been going on for a long time.
different times, different standards Dan.
Let's not play the moral equivalence game on this one, ok?
Post a comment
Potential comment conditions listed here. Oh, and you may use basic HTML for formatting.
I wouldn't be surprised if the stories were true. I've met plenty of military folks in the last few years who, if put in a combat situation like this guy, I could easily see pulling those kind of disgusting stunts, just based on the way they act in non-combat environment. I don't know why people always assume that stories like this are fake just because it's the "liberal" media printing them.