Comments Posted By busboy33
Displaying 621 To 630 Of 657 Comments
A RESPONSE TO CRITICS OF MY LAST POST
@Dilbert:
"What I am saying is that propaganda is most definitely part of the war (I’m going to take for granted that this isn’t in dispute). Part of AQ’s propaganda is that US troops are committing atrocities, that they are a crusader army running amok and raping, pillaging and burning.
This (false) story by TNR plays into AQ propaganda.
Since this story plays into AQ propaganda TNR (or any other media player doing something like this) should be damn careful fact check to ensure it is true before publishing it. They weren’t and they didn’t."
I agree 100 percent. As I said before, the MSM has gone comatose with their duties, on BOTH sides of the propaganda (again, the "yellowcake uranium" is an example of the US propaganda IMO). Its gone to "print whatever anybody tells you," and I firmly believe that its a prime reason our country is where it is now.
"We don’t need to speculate about whether he lied or not or how we know. The proof he lied is that TNR says he retracted the part about the woman in Iraq.
His first sentence says he saw her every day at chow in Iraq. Unless you think he just made an error about what he saw and did every day in Iraq he’s a liar by TNR’s admission.
A multiple liar in his first sentence."
Again, true. Even Mr. Beauchamp's supporters on the Left acknowledge that the part about mocking the injured woman is not correct. Does that establish the rest of the allegations (playing with children's skulls, running over dogs, etc.) are also false? Certainly suspect to an extreme degree, but discounted out of hand?
My concern is that the WS article (I've been told) says that he wrote an admission that ALL of it is a flat lie, and that seems to be what the Right Blogosphere is screaming about. To completely discount the entire narrative, for me, requires more than anonymous assurances from the Admin that nobody can verify.
As I said before, I haven't been following the Beauchamp story, so I'm late to the party. While I have never served in the military (two deficiencies: I don't wake up before 7am and I react violently to people giving me orders) I have several friends in, and some over in the sandpit. Statistically, when you get 100,000+ people together, you're gonna have at least one problem child (as Haditha demonstrates). An atrocity is GOING to happen during a large, protracted war -- I don't see any possibility of avoiding it.
My concern with this story echoes Mr. Moran's: The Right will make too much of this. The language flying about the Intertubes seems to be reaching for "Beauchamp proves any questioning of military personnel is Treason," and thats the leap I'm worried about. As you said, if it were true, then it should be reported. As the Tillman case demonstrates, people will lie to protect themselves (thats a natural human reaction IMO, not a sign of evil). The Wingnut approach (again, IMO) seems to be
"don't ask, don't tell, and America keeps her virginity." This cognitive position is too weak for our country, and will end allowing problems to occur in the future.Decrying Beauchamp (Man, I'd love some verification on that confession) is appropriate (I hate liars) and pointing out TNR didn't take Journalism 101 is almost a civic duty. But I don't think logically the story can be taken anywhere beyond that (by either side).
Military question: The reports I'm seeing say that Beauchamp is being punished by taking away his cell phone and laptop, and thats it. I'm not familiar with Military Justice (I worked civilian justice for years, and I know Military Conduct rules are different), but that seems extraordinarily lenient for falsely calling your squadmates War Criminals. I assume you don't have direct experience with Military Courts, but does this "jibe" with your experience in the service? I'd have thought at least a transfer (to the North Pole) and a rank penalty of some kind. That's like "teenage son broke curfew" penalty.
Again, thank you for the input and opinions.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 9.08.2007 @ 12:34
@baldilocks (great name, btw!):
"Here’s the way I read it: as “equating people who LIE about the military (and the war itself?) as being 'pawns' of AQ."
I think thats my concern. "Lie" implies that TNR knew, beforehand, that the story was BS, and printed it anyway, as opposed to simply rushing in without checking facts.
I'm not saying that they did or didn't lie, but the fact that Mr. Beauchamp's stories may not be true does not automatically make TNR liars, only embarassingly poor journalists. The NYTimes printed the "anonymous administration source"'s story that Iraq tried to buy yellowcake uranium. Turned out to be a lie. The source lied, sure, but did the Times lie or just fail to fact check? And is there a difference? To me, there is. Mabye there isn't.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 8.08.2007 @ 13:25
I've just been reading up on Mr. Beauchamp, as I wasn't really following the story too closely prior to all this.
re: the proof that he's lying.
Is it really all coming down to the Weekly Standard claiming that an unnamed military person told them it didn't check out? I don't read the WS, so I haven't seen the article, but the MSM is noting that nobody independent has, so far, verified the alleged written admission (calls to the military have been met with "no idea what you're talking about" by several reporters), and the report is private.
Not saying Mr. Beauchamp was telling the truth, but if the proof he lied is "government said so" I'm EXTREMELY suspect.
Any Weekly Standard readers in the thread? Did they actually cite to anything except an unnamed, anonymous source?
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 8.08.2007 @ 11:27
@ Dilbert:
"Propaganda is designed to undermine the will of the American people to fight the war. Potraying US troops as an undisciplined mob running amok committing war crimes and atrocities is a very specific part of AQ’s propaganda."
I don't defend TNR at all but I'm very worried by this argument. I'm reading your post as equating people who speak in a negative way about the military (and the war itself?) as being "pawns" (my word, not yours) of AQ. That may be a wrong interpretation, but that's what I'm taking from it.
I'm not trying to start a flame war, but I have a serious question: if the Beauchamp story were true, would it still be propaganda to publish it? From what I take from your post, it would still be labled as such -- undermining the will of the people to wage war. Certainly Abu Grahib, the recent murder trials, the lost weapons, Haditha, all those stories besmirch some members of the military.
Let me offer a counter definition of propaganda: information designed to trick the listener/viewer into believing or feeling a certain way. Advertising is propaganda ("buy an iPhone and you'lre cool!!"). Its the argument style of choice for those who usually don't have facts on their side.
I'm opposed to propaganda, in all its forms. Covering up such stories (if true) is just as much propaganda, and just as morally reprehensible. It seems you assume a sinister motive to TNR actions. Let me offer a different possiblity. TNR ran with what they (sloppily) thought was a legitimate story. Once it became clear that they blew it, they took the cowards road and tried to dodge the bullet rather than correct their mistake and take their lumps. Same result, no sinister motive. Would that change your assessment of the situation, or do you still feel the same?
Again, I'm honestly asking these questions, not trying to be snarky or anything. If I can pry, are you recently out of the corps, or a long(er) time civilian?
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 8.08.2007 @ 10:36
@topsecretk:
"I’m not positive, but I suspect that many took exception to your original post because a certain key quality isn’t being acknowledged and that is the conduct of TNR’s post Beauchamp conduct.
I think it’s pretty obvious the consensus, that while righty bloggers weren’t enchanted with TNR’s non-existent fact checking, the central belief was Beauchamp lied to them as well."
No doubt. Unfortunately, I guess you can add TNR to the list of news providers that have devolved into style and ratings over substance. Of all the stories surrounding this war, the failure of the Fourth Estate to do their duty is becoming numbing in its repetition. I have to go searching for even the appearance of fact checking. Thats why I read here (say what you will about Mr. Moran, but he does his homework), and Leftie sites like TPM.
The common thread between them, aside from the fact checking? When they get something wrong, they immediately notify the viewers and correct the mistake. Like you said, TNRs response after the problem was raised is the most damning part of this: rather than figure out if there was a problem or not, the verbal bombs started flying. Like I said before, this makes me feel old. I want Mr. Cronkite back to just let me know what the heck is going on in the world for 30 minutes a day.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 7.08.2007 @ 23:29
It amazes me the "you are not red enough" posts. Unless I misread the post, you were saying Mr. Beauchamp is a story: nothing more, nothing less. If I was on a liberal blog, and the post was "Troops convicted of murder, but don't read too much into it", I can't imagine the responders flaming with "How dare you not use these few idiots to smear all soldiers!! Turn in your Leftie card!!." I'm sure some of your readers disagree that the response would be any less dramatic, and mabye I'm lucky and only go to sites that have a lower precentage of trolls than is average.
Righties scream, Lefties lecture I guess.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 7.08.2007 @ 20:42
Rick said:
"Why must everything in blogs be all or nothing? Is there no place where proportionality matters? A little nuance? A little deeper look at something rather than the raw, emotional primal scream of irrationality?"
Clearly not. Your first line said it all: "The right will make too much of this. The Left will make too little."
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 7.08.2007 @ 16:26
BLOGS MISSING THE REAL STORY AS USUAL
@Thom:
"Shouldn’t the question be, rather than has the Left damaged morale (a question I’d pose differently), was the Left correct to question the legitimacy of the war in the first place."
And there the truth is. Yes, making the Admin look like lying theving dirtbags makes Americans feel bad . . . but that Dubya's (and crew) fault. The Lewinsky scandal made Americans distrustful of their President . . . but that was Clinton's fault for banging the intern then lying, not the fault of Linda Tripp for keeping the evidence.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 7.08.2007 @ 16:13
@Pablo:
True, and I was being overly snarky. I lost respect for the MSM after the NYTimes Plame fiasco. Remeber the good old days, when reporters searched for verifiable facts, and publishers and editors reviewed the substance to make sure it was reliable? Christ, all this makes me feel old.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 7.08.2007 @ 11:36
Mr. Moran:
As usual, a level-headed, informative post. I'd say well done again, but frankly I'm getting tired of telling you. Do some bad work, once in a while. Just for variety.
I am chuckling at some of the comments in this thread, specifically the "gotta fight the tsunami-like wave of lies from the Left" crew. I'm opposed to lying from anybody, right or left (hell, up or down). As the hippie in the thread, I won't defend him -- if he lied, then its on him.
For the thread warriors: I completely understand your anger. Somebody lying to you to try and influence the course or opinions of the war is reprehensible. As I mentioned in the Gonzales post, my image of Rightie/Conservative presumes a somewhat violent reaction to lies and manipulation. Thank god the thread warriors have found the culprit: a blogger. Now, with all of the liars out of the way, we can finally see how successful the war is really going. Must have been hard for the Administration all this time -- I mean, they've got press briefings, leaks to the MSM, talk show tours, and the Evil Left has bloggers. Poor Dubya. How can a Decider possibly get the True Word out, when he's so woefully underpowered? Shame. No wonder people think things are going to hell there . . . so many lies.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 7.08.2007 @ 11:10
