I guess the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Beauchamp, as an ambitious wannabe author, took a lot of liberties with his stories, changing places and events for the sake of a more dramatic narrative. But there’s a core of truth in that his musings are based on real experience. Of course, the army’s viewpoint is that the falsifications technically make his reports a lie. Imho this is the best explanation for those differing accounts we heard.

But, who cares, as long as we don’t see get more informations about the investigations and the testimonies this is idle guesswork. And there are more urgent topics to talk about.

Their declarations of victory have been premature and uncorroborated.

Only Goldfarb and Bob Owens’ claims of email confirmation from coalition P.R. officers stand as “evidence.”

I do not believe that such confirmations of internal investigations of individual soldiers is standard military policy, and I must hold judgment in abeyance until something more definitive is offered — presuming Centcom to be 100% reliable and truthful. Even with that presumption, the jury is still out.

I would prefer to see the alleged “signed statement” before passing judgment. Clearly Goldfarb, Owens, and the other snarling, snarking attackers don’t. But thus far it is logically unwarranted — most especially given the EXTREMELY high bar they have set for TNR’s veracity in this matter.

And that’s a classicallty “moderate” and serious position.

But, since that NON-certitude is what Goldfarb, et al have been screaming about for three weeks now, surely we must reserve our journalistic scorn for this gutter form yellow journalism, that has already (prematurely) called for the firing of various TNR editors, etc. ; that has prematurely smeared the reputation of Private Beauchamp in a combat zone, placing him in — the most extreme case — peril of his very life. And that has attempted (through the casual invocation of another, unrelated credibility scandal that is a logically specious argument against TNR’s credibility)

This remains what you called it this morning, Mr. Gandelman: an attack by The WEEKLY STANDARD against THE NEW REPUBLIC.

At this point, TNR’s statement, if true, boomerangs the entire argument.

I will add that it is an ORCHESTRATED attack, and has morphed from the position that “Scott Thomas” is some creative fiction writer stateside (and not a REAL soldier, to well, OK, he’s a soldier, but he was making it ALL up.

The only substantiated facts thus far are that 1) Goldfarb and Company have been demonstrably wrong and never demonstrably RIGHT, and that, while questions might exist about TNR’s story, TNR has rechecked and twice claimed the story to be substantially and essentially correct in all its particulars. Saying it ain’t so don’t make it not so.

Either way, the jumping the gun, the counting of unhatched chickens, and crowing about unconfirmed rumors (one can’t call them reports) has been premature, mean-spirited and excessively unprofessional.

Moderation should demand something more than an equivocating “a plague on both their houses.” TNR’s credibility has not yet been destroyed, and the Pajamas Media/Malkin/Goldfarb coordinated attack has not yet proven credible, for all the shouting and braying.

While I must withhold judgment on TNR’s veracity, I think that the Goldfarb/Malkin axis has a whole lot of questions to answer on this matter. They should not be immune from tarring from the brush they have thus far wielded with such casual viciousness.

TNR’s editorial process is badly flawed, and in running this series, they not only got more than they bargained for, but besmirched the US Army based on the fabrications of a soldier who was provided an unfettered outlet for his fictionalized account….

Why doesn’t TNR ask TWS’s Goldfarb if he can put them (TNR’s editors) in touch with his source who claims Beauchamp signed a recantation?

Why doesn’t TNR tell it’s readers that Maj. Lamb also said: “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.”