Sure, we know that the Army always tells the truth (ask the Tillman family) and that by not making the results of its investigation public and silencing the writer in question, the Army has even less credibility.

We also know that the Weekly Standard supports the liars who lied us into Iraq by lying in the first place and that the liars who lied us into Iraq by lying aren't above paying "journalists" to write stories that favor their failed policies.

There's also a chance that the New Republic is full of shit although the results of their investigation were, at least, made known.

But really, does America care anyway?

As a local columnist said the other day (paraphrasing), one-percent of Americans are fighting and dying in Iraq and ninety-nine percent of Americans are ignoring that fact.

Iraq | Army: Chilling Iraq stories untrue

An Iraqi boy befriends American troops and later has his tongue cut out by insurgents. Soldiers mock a disfigured woman sitting near them in a dining hall. As a diversion, soldiers run over dogs with armored personnel carriers.

Compelling stuff, and, according to the Army, not true.

...

After the pieces were questioned, the magazine said it extensively re-reported his account, contacting dozens of people, including former soldiers, forensic experts, war reporters and Army public-affairs officers.

The Associated Press has been unable to reach Beauchamp, and the Army said details of the investigation were not expected to be released.