Posted on 07/26/2007 4:26:20 AM PDT by TomB
A STATEMENT FROM SCOTT THOMAS BEAUCHAMP:
As we've noted in this space, some have questioned details that appeared in the Diarist "Shock Troops," published under the pseudonym Scott Thomas. According to Major Kirk Luedeke, a public affairs officer at Forward Operating Base Falcon, a formal military investigation has also been launched into the incidents described in the piece.
Although the article was rigorously edited and fact-checked before it was published, we have decided to go back and, to the extent possible, re-report every detail. This process takes considerable time, as the primary subjects are on another continent, with intermittent access to phones and email. Thus far we've found nothing to disprove the facts in the article; we will release the full results of our search when it is completed.
In the meantime, the author has requested that we publish the statement below. --The Editors
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 BeauchampMy 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.
So it was Scott Thomas HIMSELF that’s making jokes of disfigured vitims. Hmmmmmm. Does he also drive a Bradley?
There is no honor here, he was about ready to be outed (see Ace o' Spades blog) and he was just beating them to the punch. If he did have any honor, he wouldn't have engaged in any of the behavior and he would have reported all the other incidents he observed to the proper authorities.
NewGrounds is a site loaded with sometimes entertaining user-submitted content in the form of flash videos, flash games, music, etc. I remember playing many flash games where you get to beat up or bomb Osama or Saddam, among other things, on that site. Go HERE to find out more.
Korova seems to be a user on the site. Why he would call out Scott Thomas Beauchamp that way is still unknown. Will have to dig further. One guess is that Korova is actually Beauchamp himself and he thought he was being cute by putting that stuff in the comment portion of his own page.
Here's a SOLID hit:
He has (or had) a blog at BlogSpot.com called Sir Real Scott Thomas. At one time it was called ghostsonfilm (hence the name) but the title page says Sir Real Scott Thomas. Go to ghostsonfilm.blogspot.com. We better suck some of this down before he makes it disappear as the heat gets turned up on him.
He lists his name as: PFC Scott Beauchamp A Co. 1 18 Infantry, 2nd BCT, 1st ID
The last post he made on his blog was September of 2006 and his earliest was January 2006. He's got a number of entries here that I have not gone through yet.
Has this guy been authenticated as a soldier yet??
If you’re interesting in reading his pre-TNR blather, this looks like his blog:
ghostsonfilm.blogspot.com
I was wondering the same thing......did he commit a crime when publishing this stuff?
They have found his blog on Hot Air, and there is quite a lively discussion going on. (Nothing on the gaming site though) . Apparently he is into writing war stories (surprise, surprise) - liberal arts studies (another big surprise) and he does not like the GOP (I’m sure THAT came as a really big surprise).
If he is in Iraq because he thinks he will become a new Hemingway is anybody’s guess.
I hope PVT Beauchamp enjoys his 15 minutes of fame. He has just taken A/1-18 INF out of the war for at least a week. He has wrecked his platoon leader’s career, and probably his company commander’s as well. Blogging from theater is going to become even harder, thanks to him. He has brought dishonor and discredit upon himself, his unit, and the United States Army. This Blue Falcon from FOB Falcon richly deserves what he has coming to him.
He is The Surge’s Lyndi England.
More from Power Line
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/018343.php
Scott Thomas speaks
“The editors” of the New Republic have posted a statement from the soldier formerly known as Scott Thomas — he now identifies himself as Private Scott Thomas Beauchamp — with this preface:
As we’ve noted in this space, some have questioned details that appeared in the Diarist “Shock Troops,” published under the pseudonym Scott Thomas. According to Major Kirk Luedeke, a public affairs officer at Forward Operating Base Falcon, a formal military investigation has also been launched into the incidents described in the piece.
Although the article was rigorously edited and fact-checked before it was published, we have decided to go back and, to the extent possible, re-report every detail. This process takes considerable time, as the primary subjects are on another continent, with intermittent access to phones and email. Thus far we’ve found nothing to disprove the facts in the article; we will release the full results of our search when it is completed.
In the meantime, the author has requested that we publish the statement below.
Scott Thomas Beauchamp writes:
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.
Now that Beauchamp has stepped forward, the issues regarding the veracity of “Shock troops” should be resolved in short order. It is striking that Beauchamp’s statement does not add any facts to support the veracity of “Shock troops,” although his identity is certainly a start. Yesterday ABC News published an account of the contorversy by Marcus Barum. Barum’s account quotes New Republic editor Franklin Foer on the fact-checking that preceded publication of Beauchamp’s “Shock Troops” article:
As for the specific accounts in the stories, Foer said that the articles were rigorously fact-checked before they were published. “We showed the stories to people who’d been embedded in Iraq to make sure that it all smelled good. We talked to one of the members of his unit to confirm the woman, a female contractor. We talked to a medic who’d served in Iraq to make sure that a woman could be in an FOB. We spent a lot of time with him on the phone asking hard questions.”
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.
JOHN adds: That’s right. In the meantime, Beauchamp’s concern over the “character” of his “comrades in arms” being “called into question” is touching. I’d had the impression that that was the sole purpose of his articles.
Michelle Malkin has a whole lot more on Beauchamp, who has a blog and a MySpace page. He’s a pretentious ass, and a lefty. Here he is:
“Scott Thomas” steps out of the shadows Update: The blog of “Sir Real Scott Thomas” Update: His MySpace page
By Michelle Malkin • July 26, 2007 08:35 AM
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/07/26/scott-thomas-steps-out-of-the-shadows/
Many links, please click on link for more
What is that supposed to mean? Why not simply write:
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.
Perhaps he's simply a bad writer, on the other hand maybe he's letting slip the fact that he never actually witnessed the events he describes, but merely believes them to be plausible.
did he commit a crime when publishing this stuff?
If memory serves soldiers a supposed to clear blog posting with their CO., not sure if the same applys to magazine articles.
OTOH I had a Flight Chief in Korea who said “I can’t make you do it...but I can make you wish you had.”
Young master Beauchamp’s life is about to get veeery interesting...and not in a good way.
I was a Security Policeman and let’s just say we had ways of dealing with people like him.
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/07/26/scott-thomas-steps-out-of-the-shadows/
And a reader e-mails this info:
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.
There will be an investigation at his unit. His NCOs and chain of command will come under scrutiny. The fellow soldiers which he BLUE FALCONED are going to be hating on him in a big way.Except that the military will have no record of a “Private Scott Thomas Beauchamp” either.
My guess is someone figured out who he was, so it was time to reveal it. Anyway, if the theory he’s shooting for a job after Iraq is true, he’d need his name attached to the story.
This is all horse *hit. I assume his command will be sending him home to face a court martial. This is the kind of jerk that should be run out of the military, not brave Marines that are now on trial for following their mission assignments.
My, my. PVT Beauchamp will, no doubt, be the darling of the anti-war crowd upon his return. It isn’t, as others have pointed out, the plausibility of the accusations that is in question, it’s their veracity. LT Kerry’s lies were plausible, but they were still lies.
Also, this is from his Myspace page:
..., but I cant do it without getting through this army experience first, which will add a legitimacy to EVERYTHING i do afterwards, and totally bolster my opinions on defense, etc, and of course its making me a lot less lazy, just because im not use to being lazy any more, etc.
IOW, he joined the military to legitmize his liberal opinions.
Yeah, when I posted that, it was just my initial reaction. The point being that I wouldn’t be so quick to suddenly believe anything he says now.
I’ve read up on all of that stuff since, and now I’m convinced this is all part of a plan for him to run for Congress as a Democrat in 2008.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.