Moderateman Moderateman

Lying Liberals Busted

Lying Liberals Busted

An Article by Sweet Ann Coulter

In their latest demonstration of how much they love the troops, liberals have produced yet another anti-war hoax.

The New Republic has been running "true war" stories from a brave, anonymous liberal penning dispatches from Iraq. The famed "Baghdad Diarist" described his comrades joyfully using Bradley fighting vehicles to crush stray dogs, mocking a female whose face had been blown off by an IED, and defacing Iraqi corpses by wearing skull parts on their own heads.

Various conservatives began questioning the plausibility of the anonymous diarist's account -- noting, for example, that Bradley vehicles don't "swerve," as the diarist claimed. The editor of The New Republic responded by attacking the skeptics' motives, complaining that some conservatives make "a living denying any bad news that emanates from Iraq."
But when that clever retort failed to quiet rumblings from the right wing, The New Republic finally revealed the "Baghdad Diarist" to be ... John Kerry! Actually it was Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp, Democratic candidate for president circa 2028. (That gives him 20 years to learn to pronounce "Genghis.")

In revealing himself two weeks ago, Beauchamp lashed out at "people who have never served in Iraq." He said he was too busy fighting "an actual war" to participate in "an ideological battle that I never wanted to join."

He had tried to stay out of ideological battles by writing made-up articles in a national magazine claiming soldiers in Iraq had become callous beasts because of George Bush's war, killing to "secure the riches of the empire." Alas, this proved an ineffective method of keeping his head low. Beauchamp's next bid for privacy will be an attempt to host "The Price Is Right."

In response to Beauchamp's revelation that he was the "Baghdad Diarist," the military opened an investigation into his allegations. There was no corroboration for his stories, and Beauchamp promptly signed an affidavit admitting that every single thing he wrote in The New Republic was a lie.
 



 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
According to The Weekly Standard's Michael Goldfarb -- who has led the charge of those who "make a living denying any bad news that emanates from Iraq" -- Maj. Steven F. Lamb, the deputy public affairs officer for Multi-National Division-Baghdad, said this of the Baghdad diarist:

"An investigation has been completed and the allegations made by Pvt. Beauchamp were found to be false. His platoon and company were interviewed and no one could substantiate the claims."

In response, The New Republic went into full Dan Rather loon mode. This astonishing post showed up on The New Republic Web site on Tuesday afternoon:

"A STATEMENT ON SCOTT THOMAS BEAUCHAMP:

"We've talked to military personnel directly involved in the events that Scott Thomas Beauchamp described, and they corroborated his account as detailed in our statement. When we called Army spokesman Maj. Steven F. Lamb and asked about an anonymously sourced allegation that Beauchamp had recanted his articles in a sworn statement, he told us, 'I have no knowledge of that.' He added, 'If someone is speaking anonymously (to The Weekly Standard), they are on their own.' When we pressed Lamb for details on the Army investigation, he told us, 'We don't go into the details of how we conduct our investigations.' -- The Editors"

It's good to see Mary Mapes is working again.

What on earth is going on? Either the military investigation found that Beauchamp lied or it didn't. Either military personnel corroborated stories of soldiers wearing skulls as crowns or they didn't. Either Army spokesman Maj. Steven Lamb gave a statement to The Weekly Standard or he didn't.

At the same time as The New Republic was posting the above statement, which completely contradicted The Weekly Standard's update, renowned right-wing news outlet ABC News confirmed that the military has concluded that Beauchamp was writing "fiction." ABC also quoted Goldfarb's account and said that Maj. Lamb reiterated his statement that Beauchamp's stories were false to ABC. The New York Times had the same story on Wednesday.

The New Republic has gone mad. Perhaps the magazine brought its former employee, fantasist Steven Glass, out of retirement. It's long past time for The New Republic to file for intellectual Chapter 7. Arthur Andersen was implicated in fewer frauds.

And we wonder how Democratic congressmen can lie about a vote they lost on the floor of the House -- captured on CSPAN for all the world to see -- changing the vote so that they win.

America's imminent victory in Iraq and safety from terrorist attacks at home is driving them all crazy.
"
39,490 views 151 replies
Reply #51 Top
Hey Jacob, I've been in black helicopters and have worked side by side with FEMA. Oooooh, I must be part of the whole conspiracy, huh!

(<><>) We are Always Watching (<><>)


No that's not the way it is man and that's not the way we see it. I know it must be hard being a soldier and what you guys are fighting for is receiving such a negative response by so many people. You were just following orders. The men and woman of this country did allot after 9/11 and I appreciate everything they have done, but I still believe they were mislead and lied to. Also it took way to long for the government to get their sorry ass into New Orleans and help the people.
Reply #52 Top

Reply By: SodaihoPosted: Tuesday, August 14, 2007
AI can and will lighten up on using 'loony left' and liberal traitors' in such a cavalier way, I will save the terms for the ones that in my eyes deserve it, like Pelosi and Reid and Durban and Kennedy, but I was calling John Kerry HanoiJohn when I was still a Democrat have been calling him that since 1973, he gets no slack OR respect fro me. ever.


Not good enough. To refer to Senators and congressmen as traitors is abhorrent, in my opinion. These individuals have a different point of view and have worked tirelessly on behalf of their constituency and the United States. We should always respect them. You may disagree, but respectfully.

As to John Kerry, I think he is a true hero. Not only did he fight on behalf of his country, received the Bronze Star, Silver Star, and three Purple Hearts, but he had the courage to stand with fellow veterans during the war to stop the bloodshed. No coward here. Frankly, anyone who thinks so is well, I can't say...

I don't know about Kerry meeting with the "enemy". At what point and in what capacity and for what purpose? I know I returned to Vietnam in the mid-eighties and met with several "enemy soldiers". We still refused to have diplomatic relations with Vietnam, so I had to get my visa through Thailand. I guess I must be a traitor as well in your book.

So, if we were to use your logic then, and Iran is part of some wicked enemy front, then shouldn't we be referring to our Secretary of State, TehranCondi?


Be well?

No my friend after first besmirching every combat vet that fought in

Vietnam in 1973 on the floor of Congress, while he was still a civilian and not in politics, he then met with the Enemy in Paris while we were still fighting in a war, the very fact that he was a silver star and bronze star winner gave him some credence but no power to broker anything, his efforts could and should have been considered aiding and abetting the enemy in time of war. He call me a baby killer, a rapist, a murderer, he claimed that I shot civilians in the back for sport, that I cut heads off of women for trophies, That I collected ears of enemy soldiers and wore them as a necklace, Now can you see why I cut Hanoi john no slack?

Reply #53 Top

Reply By: JacobKerrPosted: Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Hey Jacob, I've been in black helicopters and have worked side by side with FEMA. Oooooh, I must be part of the whole conspiracy, huh!

(<><>) We are Always Watching (<><>)


No that's not the way it is man and that's not the way we see it. I know it must be hard being a soldier and what you guys are fighting for is receiving such a negative response by so many people. You were just following orders. The men and woman of this country did allot after 9/11 and I appreciate everything they have done, but I still believe they were mislead and lied to. Also it took way to long for the government to get their sorry ass into New Orleans and help the people.

Look I agree we had no business starting a war in Iraq, and the war has been mishandled, I also agree it took to long for the Katrina response, but that problem lies at the feet of not just Fema, but the Governor of Louisiana and the mayor of New Orleans too. See My problem with Liberals is they shift all blame to Bush and ignore where the rest of the blame went, there were buses waiting to take civilians away from New Orleans, but ray Nagin the mayor did not use them. The state needs to accept their role in the cluster fuck that Katrina was and still is years later.

Reply #54 Top
Jacob:
Also it took way to long for the government to get their sorry ass into New Orleans and help the people.


Don't even get me started on New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina. I've been in Emergency Management and done disaster recovery. What that idiot Nagin did to those people in New Orleans was just plain manslaughter, sending them back to their homes without even bothering to wait for his own Emergency Managers to assess the area first.

Did you ever wonder why that same FEMA that seemed to incompetent in Lousiana did such a great job in Alabama and Texas? Of course you didn't, the press gave you a ready made villain and you took to it like a covert bomb to the flood walls. Nevermind that the same press couldn't decide whether 3 or 100 were murdered in the Superdome... when the truth was... 0!

Don't even think of coming at me with that crap, not unless you have some experience to back up what you spew!
Reply #55 Top
Vietnam in 1973 on the floor of Congress, while he was still a civilian and not in politics, he then met with the Enemy in Paris while we were still fighting in a war, the very fact that he was a silver star and bronze star winner gave him some credence but no power to broker anything, his efforts could and should have been considered aiding and abetting the enemy in time of war. He call me a baby killer, a rapist, a murderer, he claimed that I shot civilians in the back for sport, that I cut heads off of women for trophies, That I collected ears of enemy soldiers and wore them as a necklace, Now can you see why I cut Hanoi john no slack?


So did Kissinger meet with "the enemy." Come on. A civilian has the right and the obligation to stand for a moral point of view, even in the midst of war. As to the atrocities of war, we are all killers, in my opinion. We all have blood on our hands. I knew of many soldiers who lost it in combat and sprayed anything that moved and I knew of a guy who actually collected ears. I myself torched villes. We stopped wearing white hats a long time ago. To the point, though, he actually claimed you, specifically, did this? Or are you denying that such things were done? It seems to me that if we witnessed such things, heard of such things, or did such things we had (and continue to have) an obligation to speak up to stop it. Of course, however, in doing so, we clearly run the risk of being taunted. So it goes.

Welcome Home Brother.
Reply #56 Top
The state needs to accept their role in the cluster fuck that Katrina was and still is years later.


I lived in New Orleans for four years. Cluster fuck doesn't even begin to describe how horrible the government there is. For the record.
Reply #57 Top

You do not know me...

Oh, but we do.  I know your milner, and he says your new tin foil chapeau is ready.

Reply #58 Top

No that's not the way it is man and that's not the way we see it.

We?  I thought ET was here alone?

Reply #59 Top
Jacob:
Also it took way to long for the government to get their sorry ass into New Orleans and help the people.


Don't even get me started on New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina. I've been in Emergency Management and done disaster recovery. What that idiot Nagin did to those people in New Orleans was just plain manslaughter, sending them back to their homes without even bothering to wait for his own Emergency Managers to assess the area first.

Did you ever wonder why that same FEMA that seemed to incompetent in Lousiana did such a great job in Alabama and Texas? Of course you didn't, the press gave you a ready made villain and you took to it like a covert bomb to the flood walls. Nevermind that the same press couldn't decide whether 3 or 100 were murdered in the Superdome... when the truth was... 0!

Don't even think of coming at me with that crap, not unless you have some experience to back up what you spew!


What is it that I "spew". LOL I agree with every thing you said, well done . As far as people being murdered in the Superdome all I know is that if any did it was civilians murdering other civilians etc. not FEMA.
Reply #60 Top
Hey Dr Guy your not funny so do us all a favor and STFU...
Reply #61 Top
Hey Dr Guy your not funny so do us all a favor and STFU...


You know it's "not" my blog, it's MM's. But since I consider MM AND DrGuy friends of mine, I will respond to this for them.

1) "YOU" don't tell anyone on this particular blog to STFU!

2) You're the only one here who's NOT funny!

3) And while I'm at it, "YOU" STFU!
Reply #62 Top
Hey Dr Guy your not funny so do us all a favor and STFU...


You know it's "not" my blog, it's MM's. But since I consider MM AND DrGuy friends of mine, I will respond to this for them.

1) "YOU" don't tell anyone on this particular blog to STFU!

2) You're the only one here who's NOT funny!

3) And while I'm at it, "YOU" STFU!


NO YOU STFU and I'M NOT TRYING TO BE FUNNY!
Reply #63 Top
Her Kerr is so funny, I had to post it twice.
Reply #64 Top

Hey Dr Guy your not funny so do us all a favor and STFU...

OoohHh!  Such biting wit!  You cut me to the quick!

is the hat a little too snug?

I'M NOT TRYING TO BE FUNNY!

Well, at least you got one thing right.  That is one and counting.

Reply #65 Top

NO YOU STFU and I'M NOT TRYING TO BE FUNNY!


LIKE I SAID IT NOT "YOUR" BLOG TO TELL ANYONE TO STFU! So cram it where the sun don't shine!
Reply #66 Top
... this is looking more and more like a message board with each post.
Reply #67 Top
(Citizen)SodaihoAugust 14, 2007 14:12:54


I myself torched villes


are you admitting to a war crime? I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about but in 1965 through 1966 I never heard of such actions as you describe. I did not know a single person that did any of the war crimes Hanoijohn painted ALL OF US WITH. I have nothing but the deepest loathing for Hanoijohn, and hanoijane too.

Hanoijohn Betrayed every soldier that fought honorably in Vietnam, sure crimes were committed, but not all of us behaved in such a despicable manner.
Reply #69 Top
Well I'm done with this post onto the next...


The mothership has left the building!   
Reply #70 Top
No no I just moved onto other post in this forum. I'm still in the building! Watch out!
Reply #71 Top

Watch out!

Low flying saucers?

Reply #72 Top
are you admitting to a war crime? I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about but in 1965 through 1966 I never heard of such actions as you describe. I did not know a single person that did any of the war crimes Hanoijohn painted ALL OF US WITH. I have nothing but the deepest loathing for Hanoijohn, and hanoijane too.


Then you were insulated. I lit the flame myself on several hooches. War crime? Don't know. I also recall destroying food with grenades as well as a few other stupid and regretful things. I was in the Central Highlands in 1966. Kerry did not paint all of us with any such broadbrush as you say. He indicated that atrocities were happening. Listen, MM, I have spent most of my adult life as a shrink to vets, worked in Vet Centers and with VVA. In spite of what you think, I do indeed have a clue what the (in your words) fuck I am talking about. Please take awhile, do a considered read of the oral histories of that war. You will discover a ton of such incidents. While it was not common, it was hardly uncommon.

Your hatred of Senator Kerry is irrational. You might dislike him. You might think he did the wrong thing speaking to congress or tossing his medals over the white House fence, but he did these things with a point in mind: end the war. Hate is a terribly poisonous emotion. I hope you address it in therapy. A 10 year, incredibly stupid and costly war that lost 58,000 of us and wounded and maimed hundreds of thousands needed to be spoken against, just as this current ridiculous excuse for a war should be spoken against. Frankly, your apparent 'my country right or wrong' thinking makes me sad. You should know better.

Be well.
Reply #73 Top
Hate is a terribly poisonous emotion.


Hate is only poisonous when used in the wrong way. Like all emotions, hate in and of itself is not poisonous. His dislike - or hatred - of John Kerry is not irrational, and indeed, since it has been proven that Kerry lied, and by implication, implicated all American troops in Vietnam with his lies, he is worthy of contempt. A contempt that those who served there, and those who had loved ones in the theater, are justified in expressing and holding.

We must not hide the facts of the war, but like Beauchamp, those who lie and accuse others with lies and innuendo are not to be praised because one agrees with their ends (in your case you state he wanted to end the war). After all, (Godwin's law coming up), that is how the Nazis inflamed a nation to genocide against a group of people. By lying about what they did. Regardless of the ends, if the means are evil, the ends are not justified. This is clearly a case where his means were despicable and contemptuous, and for those who served with honor, they have a reason to heap scorn and hate upon Kerry. For in the end, the only difference between Kerry and Callie is in the ends. Not the means. Both were heinous, it was just the focus of their evil that was different.
Reply #74 Top
DrGuy,

Thank you, and MM for this discussion. Clearly we have serious differences. I do not think Kerry lied, as I did not lie regarding my experience in Vietnam. Because we perceive differently, because we believe differently, does not make one a liar. This is the problem with Coulter and her ilk, as well as how this discussion unfolded. Clearly atrocities were committed. Kerry said that, I said that. These are not lies. There is ample evidence, hundreds if not thousands of oral histories supporting this truth. If you believe John Kerry lied, please show me the reference. Spin is not a lie, by the way. Coulter does not lie (perhaps) but she spins. Limbaugh does not lie, but he spins; Franken does not lie, but he spins.

This is the problem: spin is not a lie, its a distortion (unless you want to be really technical and suggest the verb transitive of lie is, in fact, spin). If you want to say Kerry distorted the truth, OK. Was the distortion justified? Perhaps. In the context of a seemingly never-ending war with carpet bombing of civilian cities at stake, perhaps.

You say Kerry cast a shadow on those of us who served with honor. Perhaps. The whole war was in the shadows, just like Iraq. And so when someone tries to lift the shadow, people like you and MM want to rebuke them? For the sake of?

By the way, emotion is, by definition irrational. Emotion is not a thought, but a consequence of a thought. Again modern linguistic mud: feeling is not thought. Goodness.

Be well.
Reply #75 Top
I do not think Kerry lied,


One final note. I did not say I think Kerry Lied. I said he was proven a liar. There is a difference between saying "I think Kerry Lied" and saying "Kerry has been proven to be a liar".

I do not question your story, or cover up My Lai. War is not a civil game of cricket. As you correctly point out, I am sure you can find many instances of atrocities in any war. That does not mean you should lie to create more, and in the process defame the men and women who served there.