Stop the ACLU! Weekly Roundup 11/25-12/01/2007

I'm combining two things this week because they're both timely. First, of course, is the standard Stop the ACLU! Weekly Round-up from Jay here. Following the round-up is a little bit of help from the American Center for Law and Justice ("ACLJ") here, regarding your and your family's rights this Christmas season.

Articles:
Boston Wants to Ban Spanking
Nannystating at its core definition. Boston wants Mass to be first! I can only ask what the h**l is wrong with these people? There was a time when an unruly child got paddled when they misbehaved. Over the last couple of decades that has been set aside in favor of "time outs" and other such "punishments" that don't really work. What do we have to show for it? Unruly children terrorizing teachers across the land, falling test scores and disrespectful children.

Kucinich and Ron Paul Ticket?
Kucinich is actually suggesting his hopes for this. Wouldn't this be a sign of the apocalypse if it happens?

"Christ" Taken Out of Christmas Festival
Just another casuality in the war. Thanks to political correctness and groups like the ACLU. Chipping away at the core.

The traditional Dickens Christmas Festival has been re-named the Dickens Holiday Festival so the city can advertise in local schools.

In order to get more bang for their buck out of a thinning advertisement budget, the organization wants to put fliers in schools. For that to happen, the word "Christmas" had to be removed.

Downtown Development Coordinator Michelle Sponseller said many people are unhappy with the change.

"We changed the name this year for the schools because we wanted to advertise in the school brochures and the schools have a list of words you can't use like Santa, Christmas and Nativity. So did a brochure for the schools and we took those words out."

Hillary Plant in Republican CNN YouTube Debate?
It is basically confirmed. Of course, not admitted, but much that wasn't disclosed on this guy. He member of the Hillary Clinton campaign

Report: Guiliani's Mistress Used N.Y. Police as Taxi Service
Hopefully I don't make any enemies with this one, or accusations of eating my own, but I'm not a Rudy fan and don't look at him as one of our own anyway. I really don't understand why I'm not seeing more conservative blogs comment on this. Rudy's explanations are shabby, and don't even answer the accusations that his mistress had her own taxi service with the Police. It will be of interest to me to hear his explanations to the charges. Innocent until proven guilty. However, I think he is wrong that this will not hurt him. I've put up my opinion on this.

The ACLU Thinks This Is An Endorsement?
Seriously, the ACLU just put out a snarky press release thanking Mitt Romney for recognizing their work. It full of sarcasm, and while I'm not a big Romney fan, he just scored points with me by getting a personal attack from the ACLU.

Rudy Guiliani Should Not Be the Republican Nominee; He Really Shouldn't Even Call Himself Republican
I'm having a hard time understanding why the most liberal contender is getting so much support. I'm having a hard time understanding those that say he is the only one that can beat Hillary. He is on the opposite side of almost every conservative issue. If he were to be president it would be a backwards step for the conservative movement. It is about more than just beating Hillary. Its about beating back liberalism. The only thing that can do that is conservative values and principles being incorporated. That isn't gonna happen if Rudy Giuliani gets elected. Hopefully anyone supporting Rudy on the false premise that he is the only candidate that can beat Hillary will wake up and come back to core principles of conservatism. Thats really the only thing that can win in the end.

New York Times Hopes for SCOTUS Gun Grab
The "paper of record" once again makes like a broken record with another prosaic call to take away guns from the average American. The New York Times again displays its complete disregard of the Constitution in an editorial titled, "The Court and the Second Amendment", claiming our founding law is out of date and doesn't "confront modern-day reality." In another editorial filled with extreme language, untrue definitions and arrogance, and cementing its reputation against self-defense and American principles, the Times addressed the recent decision by the Supreme Court to soon take on the DC Gun banning reversal case. Hitting all its best low notes and filled with propaganda laced verbiage, the Times again made the case that you, Mr. and Mrs. America, are too stupid and filled with bloodlust to be trusted with a firearm… quite despite that musty, stupid old, out of date Constitution thingie.

********************

Videos:
Liveblogging CNN/YouTube Debate
I've got some nifty new way of liveblogging.

Fred Thompson's Revolution Ad
They asked for fire in the belly...heh.

Muslim Questioner at CNN Debate Was CAIR Plant
I thought you would want the scoop on this. The Plantgate keeps going and going and going.

Frontrunners Get Passed Up In Latest Iowa Poll
Things are starting to get interesting. Latest Iowa poll puts Huckabee and Obama at the top.

********************

Jay Sekulow at ACLJ has set up some guidelines for us during this Christmas season. Follow the links and contact the ACLJ if you run into any legal issues this season!


Your personal, constitutional rights are important to me and the staff at ACLJ.

We want to make sure you are fully aware of what is permissible when it comes to celebrating the Christmas holiday according to your religious beliefs.

With this in mind, we have prepared an online Christmas Resource Center that I invite you to visit right now.

There, you will find answers - clearly spelled out - to the most common questions we receive this time of year regarding your legal rights.

We have also prepared and posted legal guidelines outlining the proper way for students to express their religious beliefs in school during this holiday season.

I encourage you to visit this valuable online Christmas Resource Center and know your rights ... and the rights of your children or grandchildren ... when it comes to celebrating Christmas.

If you encounter any hostility or have further questions about your rights, contact the ACLJ at 757-226-2489.

God bless you and Merry Christmas!

********************

Lot's of good stuff, some timely, some sure to set off some excellent debates. Enjoy!

Sphere: Related Content

Dems, Rocks and Hard Places

~Snooper~

Once upon a time, in a place not very familiar to many Americans and, even obscured from view from most of the world, there is a place called the United States Senate. Close in proximity, is a place called the United States House of Representatives. Both establishments have, in the past, performed the bidding of a now obscure band of citizens, referenced to in archaic documents as "We The People". Not any longer. Through the decades, a sickness from the morphing of Political Correctness, Multiculturalism and Identity Politics into the Political Farce of American Politics, orchestrated by emotionally unstable influences, has caused a condition that requires certain politicians to rely heavily on Weather Vane Decision Accountability and Authority.

This condition has so permeated itself into the framework of American Politics that if anything gets accomplished, it is only due to Blind Luck and not Reasoned Thought. Such shameful attributes are lauded as the status quo and the ins and outs can be blamed on weather vanes. This gives way to the condition of Microwave Mentality...if life and/or results of any undertaking doesn't happen within a prescribed or preconceived period of time, the effort is deemed as untenable from the beginning and is condemned to scrutiny stemming from the lethality of hindsight.

A long, long, long time ago, way back on October 11, 2002, the United States Senate, in a vote of 77 to 23, a vast majority of Senators, approved of an obscure document called the Iraq War Resolution. In a vote of 296 to 133, a vast majority of Representatives, the United States House of Representatives passed the Iraq War Resolution, giving the President of The United States authority to "wage war".

The wind direction of that time was blowing in a certain direction. As anyone knows or, should know, wind directions change from time to time. Also, it is also common knowledge, among those that know, that "war directions" also change from time to time - not as often as the direction of the wind - but it changes all the same.

On 91101, the United States was stunned, shocked, confused and angry. We were attacked on our home turf and I had an odd chuckle at that expression; home turf. Our Embassies across the globe ARE American Soil and they were also attacked and have been attacked since 1979. The age-old saying of "this could never happen to us" was eternally shattered. I suppose the difference was this; the events of 91101 took place on American Soil Proper. War was in the air. Someone was going to pay. The problem was, the people that attacked this country, died in the Act Of War against us. So, who was to pay? It was determined that Al Qaida, a terrorist cabal, was to pay.

On 91201, there was talk from all corners of the Nation of retaliation. The once Main Stream Media lauded that as well and Retaliation was in the air. The general perception was a Country United. For the most part, this was true. In actuality, however, this was not the case. Some seem to forget about the groups of people that believed before 91101, on 91101, and after 91101 that every woe on our globe we call Earth was and is a direct result of The United States of America. Such drivel came to the fore among the American Politik during the 2004 election cycle. The term "WMD" became The Issue.

Using defective and disingenuous reasoning, the Blame America For Everything Crowds have determined that since no WMDs were found in Iraq, they therefore never existed, therefore President Bush knew they did not exist, therefore, President Bush lied. That sort of reasoning is that of an intellectually void individual.

On March 19, 2003, after diplomatic channels were exhausted and Saddam Hussein would not comply with any United Nations Resolutions, military action was launched on Saddam's Iraq. I find the CRS Report for Congress has gone largely ignored by our politicians and have chosen an avenue destructive to their political aspirations. It has also most assuredly gone ignored by the alleged Peace Movements that are nothing of the sort. They are and always have been and always will be anti-Americanist groups, disclosed here and here.

[...] President Bush has repeatedly called for regime change in Iraq. In his speech before the U.N. General Assembly on September 12, 2002, the President emphasized the dangers posed by Iraq's programs to develop WMD and urged the United Nations to live up to its responsibilities by enforcing previous U.N. Security Council resolutions that Iraq has ignored. On October 10 and 11, respectively, the House and Senate passed H.J.Res. 114 (P.L. 107-243), which authorized the President to use the U.S. Armed Forces to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing Iraqi threat and enforce all relevant U.N. Security Council sanctions regarding Iraq. At the international level, on November 8, 2002, the U.N. Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1441, which imposed a revised and more stringent weapons inspection regime on Iraq, required Iraq to submit a comprehensive declaration of all its WMD programs within 30 days, and warned of "serious consequences" if Iraq failed to cooperate.1 On March 19, 2003 (March 20 Iraq time), President Bush announced that he had launched military operations (known as Operation Iraqi Freedom) "to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger." [...]

The above is a brief snippet of the document and all six pages should be read and studied by all. Carrying on with the mantra of "illegal war" and "United States Constitution violations" is disturbingly absurd, especially since those allegations are simply untrue and have no basis or merit - except perhaps from the emotionally unstable that don't have the capability of sound reasoning and/or fact checking before they begin to ramble. I question their motives and feigned patriotism.

I have written extensively on what I call The Why we went to war with Saddam's Iraq and I also find it curious that President Bush's words are skewed and distorted to such a degree that our politicians cannot return to the original intent(s) of The Why. However, there are three key speeches given by President Bush that are a must read and, they are as follows;

President's Remarks at the United Nations General Assembly, September 12, 2002

President Discusses the Future of Iraq, February 26, 2003

President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours, March 17, 2003

The above will or, should or, perhaps can, put an end to the idiots decrying the ignorant "illegal war" and similar idiocy.

Another widely ignored report comes from DefenseLink. It is ignored for one reason and one reason only. Blind hatred of President George W Bush. There is no other explanation. Or is there? But first, what constitutes a Weapon of Mass Destruction? Is it a Nuclear Weapon? Is it a Biological Weapon? Is it a Chemical Weapon? Is it a Long-Range Missile?

WASHINGTON, June 29, 2006 - The 500 munitions discovered throughout Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center's commander said here today. [...]

I already know the answer. Do you? This brings us to the title of this article.

The Democratic Party Leadership has boxed themselves into a sticky wicket. They have painted themselves into a corner that they cannot get out of without getting "dirty", as it were.

In 2004, the Democratic Party Leadership chose Sen Kerry to oust President Bush. He ran using the WMD issue and lost. He also ran on the credo that GWB "stole" the elections of 2000 and lost. The full onslaught of the Democratic Party Leadership did not fully take hold until the elections of 2006 utilizing their masters in the Leftinistra Press. They built a premise that we were losing the War In Iraq when nothing of the sort was true. The war was going poorly indeed, much in part to a defective ROE, developed and initialized by ignorance and diplomatic screed. We certainly were not losing...there. We were losing here, at home. The only thing similar to the War In Iraq and the Vietnam War were the politicians, the anti-Americanist groups and the American News Media.

The Good News flowing in from the results of the efforts by our troops under the leadership of General David Petraeus, unanimously anointed by the full Senate, is unmistakable and undeniable. Why else are there no more "woe is me" stories in the opening segments of the news hours and leading stories on the front pages? Why have the stories vanished from the alphabet news shows and removed to the back pages of the theoretical leading newspapers?

The Libocrats, both Democrat and Republican, were relying on a quick victory in Iraq much like the quick victory over the Taliban. They were not counting on the aftermath and some claim that there was no exit strategy, assuming this military action as a financial market. Exit strategy comments in regards to a war is indicative of a person and mindset that doesn't understand war and how it changes. Plan A quickly turns into Plan Z, running through the gauntlet of change.

Let us not forget the many now "anti-war" Democrats and Republicans that were once "pro-war" Democrats and Republicans. And, I find it purely disgusting that the politicians would actually invent the terms "anti-war" and "pro-war"...two terms that are so grossly disingenuous is causes my Warrior's Blood to boil. In these modern times, in this particular point in time, the only ones I know that are "pro-war" are the Jihadis. the proper terms are "anti-victory" and "pro-victory" and, this is why.

The Democratic Party Leadership in particular and the Fraud Republicans as a notice of recognition for what they are, have so invested in defeat in this war, a defeat would mean their victory in the American Political Arena. A victory in this war would be a defeat for them in the American Political Arena.

Victor Davis Hanson has an excellent article at NRO that I ran across several days ago. He runs through the ever changing political scene and a key point I shall never forget. The nuance will escape the average anti-Americanist:

[...] The second problem was the nature of the growing antiwar mood in the country that after the pullback from Fallujah in April 2004 became frenetic. Democrats rashly fanned this national wildfire. By 2006 the conflagration had finally led to their return to power in Congress.

Unfortunately, many Democrats saw the change-of-heart in the electorate as a blanket endorsement of their own alternate universe. But it wasn't necessarily so. The voters were not necessarily interested in new ties with terrorist Syria, restoring diplomacy with Iran, gay marriage, abortion, minority-identity politics, new spending programs, open borders, closing down Guantanamo, an end to wiretaps of suspected terrorists, or the repeal of the Patriot Act.

The people were mad at the war not because they felt it was amoral or unsound policy, or because they hated George Bush, or because they wished liberals instead to end it in defeat -- but simply because they felt frustrated that we either were not winning, or not winning at a cost in blood and treasure that was worth the effort.

That Pattonesque national mood ("America loves a winner, and will not tolerate a loser") is not quite entirely gone, and was entirely misunderstood by most Democrats. Somehow instead they saw their new popularity as connected to the appeal of their politics rather than their shared anger at the mismanagement of the war. [...]

Very powerful that is. And, in light of the recent developments in the War In Iraq, that sentiment marks their doom and they know it.

The Dems are between a rock and a hard place and cannot get out unscathed. They have embraced defeatist rhetoric in the hopes of political gain, self-destructive as it has become, and they have no way out and no way to recover. The elections of 2008 will be very interesting indeed.

Just a few days ago, Rep Murtha returned from Iraq and said (my paraphrase), "By golly gee! The Surge is working". This so infuriated SoH Pelosi that she put the kibosh on that almost immediately...too late it was in the coming. Murtha has some serious damage control in his own life to consider and may have been too eager to make points with the military. We may never know for sure.

Regardless, being stuck between their rocks and their hard places, they will be crushed and exposed for what they are; disingenuous cretins.

[...] Democrats have invested everything in losing the war in Iraq and blaming it on President Bush, and now they've been proved wrong. Murtha has admitted it; other Democrats, one by one, will follow.

How much faith can Americans place in a party so committed to a national failure - and now so discredited?

Exactly so. They just cannot get anything right on Iraq, can they?

Dems are on the wrong side of history and fading fast.

"But I felt kinda embarrassed telling the Iraqis they had to get their act together and pass legislation when we can't do it back here." - Democratic Congressman Norman Dicks.

The spin before was we cannot win, pull the troops out. The spin now is we won, pull the troops out.

Will Democrats ever change their course and head for victory? [...]

Only time will tell.

Sphere: Related Content

Tolerance Must Be Reciprocal

Is Islam tolerant? What did Allah & Muhammad have to say on tolerance & related matters? [Emphasis added.]

3:19. Truly, the religion with Allâh is Islâm. Those who were given the Scripture (Jews and Christians) did not differ except, out of mutual jealousy, after knowledge had come to them. And whoever disbelieves in the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allâh, then surely, Allâh is Swift in calling to account.

3:85. And whoever seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.

3:86. How shall Allâh guide a people who disbelieved after their belief and after they bore witness that the Messenger (Muhammad) is true and after clear proofs had come unto them? And Allâh guides not the people who are Zâlimûn (polytheists and wrong-doers).

3:87. They are those whose recompense is that on them (rests) the Curse of Allâh, of the angels, and of all mankind.

3:110. You [true believers in Islâmic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islâm has forbidden), and you believe in Allâh. And had the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are Al-Fâsiqûn (disobedient to Allâh - and rebellious against Allâh's Command).

3:111. They will do you no harm, barring a trifling annoyance; and if they fight against you, they will show you their backs, and they will not be helped.

3:112. Indignity is put over them wherever they may be, except when under a covenant (of protection) from Allâh, and from men; they have drawn on themselves the Wrath of Allâh, and destruction is put over them. This is because they disbelieved in the Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allâh and killed the Prophets without right. This is because they disobeyed (Allâh) and used to transgress beyond bounds (in Allâh's disobedience, crimes and sins).

Bukhari Ch 61 # 2756: ...It is mentioned from Ibn 'Umar from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, "My provision has been placed under the shadow of my spear, and abasement and humility have been placed on the one who disobeys my command.

Allah only accepts Islam; where's the tolerance in that? Judaism & Christianity will never be accepted; Where's the tolerance in that? If anyone turns away from Islam, the curse of Allah, the angels and all mankind is upon him; where's the tolerance? Perhaps its in the hadith. Abasement, humility & destruction are consequences of disbelief. How tolerant!!

Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:

Narrated 'Ikrima:

Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"

Malik's Muwatta Book 36, Number 36.18.15:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Zayd ibn Aslam that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "If someone changes his deen - strike his neck!"[...]

Apostates may be killed. That's Islamic law.

@O8.4 Click this link, search for @O8.4.

There is no indemnity for killing an apostate (O: or any expiation, since it is killing someone who deserves to die).

Does Allah have any more choice epithets for us?

8:22. Verily! The worst of (moving) living creatures with Allâh are the deaf and the dumb, those who understand not (i.e. the disbelievers).

98:6. Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islâm, the Qur'ân and Prophet Muhammad from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikûn will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.

We are the worst of creatures; destined for Hell fire. Yep, Islam is real tolerant. Allah added something more.

9:29. Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allâh, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allâh and His Messenger (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islâm) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Is that of any force or effect, or just blowing off steam?

@O9.8: The Objectives of Jihad

The caliph (o25) makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) -which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral religions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High,

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and who forbid not what Allah and His messenger have forbidden-who do not practice the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book-until they pay the poll tax out of hand and are humbled" (Koran 9.29),

Reliance of the Traveler, the all purpose handbook of Islamic Law, told you that the Caliph makes war on Jews & Christians and why. Al-Misri quotes the same verse I quoted for you, he quotes it as the basis of fiqh. Muhammad added insult to injury.

9:30. And the Jews say: 'Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allâh, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allâh. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allâh's Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth!

What does Allah say about Muslims?

3:110. You [true believers in Islâmic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islâm has forbidden), and you believe in Allâh. And had the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are Al-Fâsiqûn (disobedient to Allâh - and rebellious against Allâh's Command).

Muslims are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; exactly what is the meaning of this? Muhammad has the answer!

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 80:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Verse:--"You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind." means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.

See how tolerant Islam is? It calls us the worst of living creatures, declares war upon us, curses us and calls for the decapitation of aptostates. Then it calls for Muslims to lead us to Islam with chains on our necks!
Why in Hell should we tolerate that?!

For those recalcitrant morons who require more evidence of Islam's violent intolerance: links to Ibn Kathir's Tafsir; the titles alone should convince anyone. Read the tafsir and curse Islam.

• The Religion with Allah is Islam
• The Supplication and Description of Al-Muttaqin
• The Order to fight People of the Scriptures until They give the Jizyah
• The Good News that Islam shall prevail
• The Good News that Muslims will Dominate the People of the Book

Sphere: Related Content

Myth vs Fact-Part 166

Myth	Fact
Islam: Religion of peace.	Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 54: Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "By Him in Whose Hands my life is! Were it not for some men amongst the believers who dislike to be left behind me and whom I cannot provide with means of conveyance, I would certainly never remain behind any Sariya' (army-unit) setting out in Allah's Cause. By Him in Whose Hands my life is! I would love to be martyred in Al1ah's Cause and then get resurrected and then get martyred, and then get resurrected again and then get martyred and then get resurrected again and then get martyred.
Tafsir

Sphere: Related Content

The New Republic Finally Admits They Cannot Stand By The Scott Thomas Beauchamp Fairy Tales

Cross posted from Wake up America cause Beth wants it and I think that anything beth wants, she should have!!!!

Finally, after all the tales were debunked and proven to be outright lies, The New Republic takes 14 pages to finally admit they cannot stand by the fairy tales manufactured by Scott Thomas Beauchamp.

Thanks to Weekly Standard and milibloggers and bloggers everywhere, they could not continue to sweep this under the rug.

Scott Thomas Beauchamp created stories about atrocities in Iraq that never happened, many people spent countless hours debunking those claims while TNR refused to admit they had not done their due diligence in fact checking and verifying those diarists stories.

Four-in-a-half months later, in a rambling piece full of excuses and phony justifications, blaming everybody but himself for not doing his job, Franklin Foer finally gets around to admitting that he "cannot be confident that the events in his pieces occurred in exactly the manner that he described them."

The new Republic's credibility= RIP

In retrospect, we never should have put Beauchamp in this situation. He was a young soldier in a war zone, an untried writer without journalistic training. We published his accounts of sensitive events while granting him the shield of anonymity--which, in the wrong hands, can become license to exaggerate, if not fabricate.

When I last spoke with Beauchamp in early November, he continued to stand by his stories. Unfortunately, the standards of this magazine require more than that. And, in light of the evidence available to us, after months of intensive re-reporting, we cannot be confident that the events in his pieces occurred in exactly the manner that he described them. Without that essential confidence, we cannot stand by these stories.

The transcripts of a conversation in September, have been published online and Beaucamp did not stand by his story, he simply refused to speak of it at all. (Correction made)

Transcript one

Private Beauchamp. During the call, Beauchamp declines to stand by his stories, telling his editors that "I just want it to end. I'm not going to talk to anyone about anything really." The editors respond that "we just can't, in good conscience, continue to defend the piece" without an explanation, but Beauchamp responds only that he "doesn't care what the public thinks." The editors then ask Beauchamp to cancel scheduled interviews with the WASHINGTON POST and NEWSWEEK.

Transcript two

"Memorandum for Record" in which Beauchamp recants his stories and concedes the facts of the Army's investigation -- that his stories contained "gross exaggerations and inaccurate allegations of misconduct" by his fellow soldiers.

Army Investigation

The Army concluded that Beauchamp had "completely fabricated" the story of mocking a disfigured woman, that his description of a "Saddam-era dumping ground" was false, and that claims that he and his men had deliberately targeted dogs with their armored vehicles was "completely unfounded." Further the report stated "that Private Beauchamp desired to use his experiences to enhance his writing and provide legitimacy to his work possibly becoming the next Hemingway."

The report concludes that "Private Beauchamp takes small bits of truth and twists and exaggerates them into fictional accounts that he puts forth as the whole truth for public consumption."

More from the American Pundit and, Hot Air goes through some of the most interesting quotes from the 14 pages of drivel.


Previously from the beginning of this saga to the end:

Serious Questions Deserve Serious Answers: Scott Thomas and TNR
Scott Thomas, John Kerry and the lies people tell
Scott Thomas and TNR Update
Followup on Scott Thomas and TNR: Story false
Hopefully the End to the TNR and Scott Thomas Saga: UPDATED & Bumped
So, I guess TNR and Scott Thomas AREN'T going to go away
TNR, Scott Thomas and Slate:Update CY debunks ANOTHER TNR claim
Quick TNR/Scott Thomas Update
I Don't Think TNR Got "Suckered", I Think They Just Suck
Final Chapter of Scott Thomas Beauchamp and TNR lies

This should end the fairy tale......then again, you never know.

.

Sphere: Related Content