« Previous · Home · Next »

Statement on Scott Thomas Beauchamp

By John

The New Republic:

Beauchamp's essay consisted of three discrete anecdotes. In the first, Beauchamp recounted how he and a fellow soldier mocked a disfigured woman seated near them in a dining hall. Three soldiers with whom TNR has spoken have said they repeatedly saw the same facially disfigured woman. One was the soldier specifically mentioned in the Diarist. He told us: "We were really poking fun at her; it was just me and Scott, the day that I made that comment. We were pretty loud. She was sitting at the table behind me. We were at the end of the table. I believe that there were a few people a few feet to the right."

The recollections of these three soldiers differ from Beauchamp's on one significant detail (the only fact in the piece that we have determined to be inaccurate): They say the conversation occurred at Camp Buehring, in Kuwait, prior to the unit's arrival in Iraq. When presented with this important discrepancy, Beauchamp acknowledged his error. We sincerely regret this mistake.

In the second anecdote, soldiers in Beauchamp's unit discovered what they believed were children's bones. Publicly, the military has sought to refute this claim on the grounds that no such discovery was officially reported. But one military official told TNR that bones were commonly found in the area around Beauchamp's combat outpost. (This is consistent with the report of a children's cemetery near Beauchamp's combat outpost reported on The Weekly Standard website.)

More important, two witnesses have corroborated Beauchamp's account. One wrote in an e-mail: "I can wholeheartedly verify the finding of the bones; U.S. troops (in my unit) discovered human remains in the manner described in 'Shock Troopers.' [sic] ... [We] did not report it; there was no need to. The bodies weren't freshly killed and thus the crime hadn't been committed while we were in control of the sector of operations." On the phone, this soldier later told us that he had witnessed another soldier wearing the skull fragment just as Beauchamp recounted: "It fit like a yarmulke," he said. A forensic anthropologist confirmed to us that it is possible for tufts of hair to be attached to a long-buried fragment of a human skull, as described in the piece.

The last section of the Diarist described soldiers using Bradley Fighting Vehicles to kill dogs. On this topic, one soldier who witnessed the incident described by Beauchamp, wrote in an e-mail: "How you do this (I've seen it done more than once) is, when you approach the dog in question, suddenly lurch the Bradley on the opposite side of the road the dog is on. The rear-end of the vehicle will then swing TOWARD the animal, scaring it into running out into the road. If it works, the dog is running into the center of the road as the driver swings his yoke back around the other way, and the dog becomes a chalk outline." TNR contacted the manufacturer of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle System, where a spokesman confirmed that the vehicle is as maneuverable as Beauchamp described. Instructors who train soldiers to drive Bradleys told us the same thing. And a veteran war correspondent described the tendency of stray Iraqi dogs to flock toward noisy military convoys.

Although we place great weight on the corroborations we have received, we wished to know more. But, late last week, the Army began its own investigation, short-circuiting our efforts. Beauchamp had his cell-phone and computer taken away and is currently unable to speak to even his family. His fellow soldiers no longer feel comfortable communicating with reporters. If further substantive information comes to light, TNR will, of course, share it with you.

Now externally that looks pretty solid, but I'm suspicious of TNR's blaming the Army for their lack of a complete account. I can't help but to wonder if TNR suspects that the Army might be preparing a report that burns them to the ground.

So, I'm reserving judgment until the Army wraps up their investigation. If Beauchamp's accounts are corroborated, then I hope that he'll be brought to justice under the UCMJ. Desecrating human remains is certainly a crime, although it's difficult to justify holding him accountable simply for transcribing the dog-killing story and mocking the disfigured woman. I suppose it could fall under Conduct Unbecoming, but that's for the Army to decide.

None of this detracts from the fact that, of the 160k troops in Iraq, TNR choose a real dirtball to serve as their correspondent. When other soldiers are out building schools, providing medical care, and running security operations for the Iraqi people, TNR decided to highlight a real slug of a mechanic who mocks the disfigured and disrespects the dead for kicks.

Hotel Tango: Baldilocks

*Update* Mike Goldbarb writes:

So we're back to where we started: Has anyone ever seen a badly disfigured woman at Camp Beuhring, or any other camp in the Middle East which might subsequently be revealed as the scene of the crime?

*Update 2* Being a Zoomie and not knowing an awful lot about Bradleys, I was willing to bite on TNR's fact-checking of the plausibility of the dog-killing story. But Jeff Emanuel, being a Zoomie who does know an awful lot about Bradleys, disagrees:

The third story, that of the Bradley Fighting Vehicles being used to purposely run over dogs, still doesn't appear -- to me, who has very little experience in them, but who also has a decent amount of time on the roads around FOB Falcon and western Baghdad -- to pass the smell test. Part of the reason for this is the way that TNR went about "corroborating" the incident, reportedly speaking to the manufacturers of the Bradley about its driving specs, including its agility and acceleration. Further, they had a soldier, who had allegedly "seen it done more than once," tell them how a dog is run over ("when you approach the dog in question, suddenly lurch the Bradley on the opposite side of the road the dog is on. The rear-end of the vehicle will then swing TOWARD the animal, scaring it into running out into the road. If it works, the dog is running into the center of the road as the driver swings his yoke back around the other way, and the dog becomes a chalk outline"). However, to me -- again, as someone who has been there -- this rings very, very hollow.

You can also read another take from Jeff here. He's a former "operator," special forces guy, so he's worth a listen.

*Update 3* Ace holds TNR upside down by the ankles and shakes. And, via Ace, Stephen Spruiell responds to this:

The recollections of these three soldiers differ from Beauchamp's on one significant detail (the only fact in the piece that we have determined to be inaccurate): They say the conversation [in which he and a fellow soldier mock a disfigured woman] occurred at Camp Buehring, in Kuwait, prior to the unit's arrival in Iraq. When presented with this important discrepancy, Beauchamp acknowledged his error. We sincerely regret this mistake.

With this:

That's a rather significant detail to flub, given that the author's intent was to illustrate the morally deadening effects of war.

Maybe it was the anticipation of war that blackened STB's soul.

*Update 4* Bryan Preston:

And what’s [Foer] asking us to do today? Why, he’s asking us to trust his relaying the word of a bunch of anonymous sources. “I can’t show you any evidence or introduce you to a single corroborating witness…”

Oh, he has “corrorborating witnesses,” or so he says. But they’re all anonymous. And they might all be the same person. We have no way of evaluating what the witness or witnesses say, because conveniently for TNR they’re not identified.

Well, that part Foer blamed on the Army....for "shutting down" his investigation.

TrackBack

Comments

Post a comment

Awards

Feedback

Military.com

Friends of OPFOR

Blogroll

Authors

Categories

Archives

Blogspot Archives

Search

Subscribe

Blogger Alliances

Data

Credits