"Scott Thomas" Story Keeps Falling Apart

Far from the report that it was a mass grave that was uncovered, it appears that a soldier who actually served at the base of operations in question, FOB Falcon, notes that an unmarked children's cemetery was discovered and the remains therein were reinterred at another location.

This soldier also notes that had anyone acted inappropriately towards a woman disfigured by an IED on the base, they would have been swiftly dealt with under the UCMJ. The same goes for disrespecting the remains of anyone discovered in the cemetery.

Similarily, driving recklessly would have resulted in harsh lecturing by the senior officers because such actions would endanger the entire unit operating in the field.

Third: When the U.S. Army takes to the streets on patrols we do it deliberately, with task and purpose. "Thomas" describes the Bradley slowing down and 'jerking' suddenly to hit dogs. This just isn't possible. If he is slowing down, then the vehicles behind him are slowing down, and there is a gap created between him and the vehicles in front of him. This would violate standard operating procedure (SOP) and make the convoy more susceptible to attack. While no one that has been to Baghdad can deny that there are large packs of wild dogs roaming the streets, to think that that is all a Bradley crew is worried about is absurd. The streets are also filled with IED's and EFP's. They line every street and and every corner. They are the number one killer in Iraq. When we travel in convoys, dogs are not our concern. We watch the streets, we look at curbs, we look at rocks, we look at windows for snipers and trigger men, we don't look at wild dogs. Also, if this guy is driving a Bradley, how is he marking his "dog kill count" in a green book. Again, any leader would have corrected this action immediately, not only because it is subject to UCMJ action, but mainly because it endangers the lives of every man in that convoy.

It would be nice if we get names instead of soldiers or contractors who aren't willing to put their names to these statements, but it appears that the weight of evidence keeps pulling towards TNR's publication of fictictious accounts of US soldiers operating in Iraq and engaging in vile acts.

Major Ludeke, the Public Affairs Officer whose responsibilities include FOB Falcon further responds:

I invite Mr. Foer and the New Republic to actually give us something to go on. Proof. Any kind will do- and something more than one anonymous soldier's claims and a nebulous "we've heard from others who can corroborate it," kinds of responses he provided Howard Kurtz. It's kind of hard to take these allegations seriously, when you're hiding behind the cloak of anonymity. Just about every Soldier these days has his or her own digital camera or video camera. Talk to anyone here- every unit down to squad level in our brigade is *required* to have a camera on every mission. It's all part of being prepared for such a discovery. Surely- there would be photos of the skulls and mass grave if it truly existed, would there not? The reason there isn't any photos, is because simply- the story isn't true.

There may be small grains of truth to what Scott Thomas has written. But, I can tell you that at least one event he's described as "fact" could not have occurred. To claim that an entire chain of command was complicit in keeping quiet such a grisly and important discovery of such magnitude stretches the realm of believability and is a grave insult to the professionalism and dedication of so many fine Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines serving here.

I know that if my organization claimed to have unearthed a sizeable cache of hundreds of explosives, rockets, nitric acid and other key components to make roadside bombs, otherwise known here in these parts as a "good news story," media outlets would rightfully demand some kind of proof to subtantiate our claims. That's why we take pictures of such things and provide them along with our press releases. The inability of the New Republic and Scott Thomas to provide any kind of photographic evidence whatsoever, and the fact that "Scott" isn't willing to come forward and identify himself, pretty much says it all, doesn't it?

Indeed. If there is evidence as TNR and Thomas claims, provide it to the military so that the matter can be fully investigated and those responsible prosecuted for violating military protocols. That's how it should be done.

That Thomas instead is hiding behind the cloak of anonymity and TNR has published this story without actual confirmation from anyone other than anonymous sources, one is left to wonder whether the whole thing is a sham, that might be based on a few kernels of fact - that a cemetery was uncovered, that there was a unit operating Bradleys at FOB Falcon, and that someone likes to tell tall tales.

UPDATE:
Confederate Yankee continues asking probing questions of TNR and Thomas.

UPDATE:
The New York Times has finally reported on the growing kerfuffle caused by TNR's publication. This line stood out:

The magazine granted anonymity to the writer to keep him from being punished by his military superiors and to allow him to write candidly, Mr. Foer said. He said that he had met the writer and that he knows with “near certainty” that he is, in fact, a soldier.

What proof was provided that he was a soldier? Military records that were confirmed with the Defense Department? Photos of Thomas in a uniform? Why only the near certainty? Why isn't Foer completely assured that Thomas is a soldier? I'd be quite concerned if I wasn't completely assured of that fact.

Others blogging: Cassandra, Irishspy, Black and Right, John at Argghhh! (who debunks the ammo angle), and The Point.