Intermarkets' Privacy Policy

Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!

Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups

The Stars Are Wrong: Astrological Investment Counselor And Kos-Partner Jerome Armstrong Fined $30,000 For Stock-Touting Payola | Main | All Charges Dropped Against Haditha Marine Sharratt
August 09, 2007

Even A TNR Expert Now Signs A Retraction

Well, not so much a retraction because he says he didn't really say what TNR claims he did -- fully "confirming" a Bradley could do what Scott Beauchamp says it did.

Confederate Yankee actually tracked down TNR's expert on this and asked him what the Bradley could do -- and, even more importantly, what exactly TNR asked him before reporting he'd fully corroborated the account.

[T]he TNR researcher did not provide the text of "Shock Troops" for Mr. Coffery [the Bradley expert] to review, and only asked the vaguest possible questions. It seems rather obvious that this was not an attempt to actually verify Beauchamp's claims, but was instead designed to help The New Republic manufacturer a whitewash of an investigation.

I'll just pick out bits here and there to encourage the click-through, but it's all pretty damning. Not conclusively so, but not good for Franklin Foer.

Confederate Yankee is specifically interested in TNR's corroborating witness (supposedly) from Beauchamp's unit claiming that the vehicle could be turned hard while still moving forward at a significant speed. I didn't even think about this, but yeah, isn't it true that tracked vehicles stand more or less still as they make hard turns, one track driving the vehicle in a circle while the other doesn't move (or turns the opposite way, to make an even tighter turn)?

Here's TNR and their corroborating Corporal Quotey McQuoterton:

"How you do this (I've seen it done more than once) is, when you approach the dog in question, suddenly lurch the Bradley on the opposite side of the road the dog is on. The rear-end of the vehicle will then swing TOWARD the animal, scaring it into running out into the road. If it works, the dog is running into the center of the road as the driver swings his yoke back around the other way, and the dog becomes a chalk outline." TNR contacted the manufacturer of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle System, where a spokesman confirmed that the vehicle is as maneuverable as Beauchamp described.

Well, is that true? Here's the actual spokesman:

I can't pretend to know what may or may not have happened in Iraq but the impression the writer leaves is that a "driver" can go on joy rides with a 35 ton vehicle at will. The vehicle has a crew and a commander of the vehicle who is in charge. In order for the scenario described to have taken place, there would have to have been collaboration by the entire crew.


Anyone familiar with tracked vehicles knows that turning sharply requires the road wheels on the side of the turn to either stop or reverse as the road wheels on the opposite side accelerates. What may not be obvious is that the track once on the ground, doesn't move. The road wheels roll across it but the track itself is stationary until it is pushed forward by the road wheels.

How the Bradley can "lurch" to the side and yet maintain enough forward speed to catch a dog in its tracks isn't really clear.

But what's more damning is this: There was absolutely no reason I can see for TNR not to have offered the name of its expert here.

Coffery seems to have no reservations about Confederate Yankee using his name; are we to believe he for some reason wouldn't permit TNR to use his name but allows a blogger to do so?

So why was this expert's name withheld from the public? He's not serving in Iraq. He's not forbidden by military codes to make unauthorized statements while in the field. He has no superior officers to chew him out.

What reason, then? When a claiming corroboration on a dubious and widely challenged story, why not offer up all the names possible so that skeptics can contact one's experts themselves and talk to them?

I think the reason is pretty obvious. TNR asked very vague questions they were reasonably confident they'd get an affirmative response to, and thus could characterize those responses as "confirmation." Go ask a vehicle manufactuer's spokesman very general questions about his product's maneuverability and durability, and what the hell do you think he's going to say? Of course he's going to call his vehicle highly maneuverable and highly durable; not to disrespect Mr. Coffery, but corporate spokesman are kind of paid to laud their products, aren't they?

Did TNR merely ask "Could a Bradley survive driving through a wall?" or the like? Of course Coffery would say yes -- the Bradley is designed to be hit by smaller tank shells and survive, after all. This isn't the relevant question. The question isn't whether the Bradley could survive this. The question TNR should have asked -- but seems to have deliberately avoided -- is "Is the Bradley so durable that it can routinely crash through walls for no other reason than the driver's enjoyment, without suffering any damage whatsoever to its combat ability?" Because that -- and not the mere fact that it could survive such a collision -- is what's necessary if we are to believe that a vehicle commander typically allows his driver to smash the vehicle through buildings just for shits n' giggles.

TNR definitely did not want anyone following their work and asking more specific questions that might start providing negative responses. And they definitely didn't want their critics to know exactly how calculatedly vague their questions, and their "confirmation," had actually been. They weren't looking for the truth; they were just looking for something they could claim as "confirmation," no matter how disingenuously.

This is getting worse. TNR began this scandal accused of sloppiness, credulity, negligence, bias, and general shoddy journalistic practice.

They are now guilty of deliberately misleading their readers, verging on outright lying.

And in the latter respect, we're not just talking about a rogue "diarist" and and credulous editor. Now we're talking about the entire magazine, from editor in chief down to its research staffers and everyone in-between, conspiring to deceive its readership and hide relevant information from the general public.

digg this
posted by Ace at 01:20 PM

| Access Comments

Recent Comments
Skip: "A little dab will do ya ..."

sal: "Or simply formulaic. A lot of authors find success ..."

pookysgirl, trying to unwind: "Since we were on vacation and needed a break from ..."

polynikes: "The tactics of Hamas and the American Left are the ..."

Common Tater: "What has struck me as an aside. Fashion. When d ..."

mrp: "Renowned author and historian Michael Beschloss (s ..."

OrangeEnt: ""The Best Part of Waking Up Is a Book Thread in Y ..."

Smell the Glove: "Thx , Perfessor (autocucumber didn't get it this t ..."

Anti-Faucist: "The tactics of Hamas and the American Left are the ..."

Wolfus Aurelius, Dreaming of Elsewhere [/i] [/b]: "[i]Worst part of Sunday morning. The end of the Bo ..."

OrangeEnt: "Worst part of Sunday morning. The end of the Book ..."

[/b][/s][/i][/u]jim (in Kalifornia): "339 Our journalist heroes. ..."

Recent Entries

Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
Powered by
Movable Type 2.64