If this was the first time you heard of Wayne Madsen....

[sabra]

Reading the latest articles and posts about Madsen, I realized that I had seen his name before.

I think some of you might be interested in his take on Wesley Clark:

<<SNIP>>

http://themeridiannews.com/clark.html

Wesley Clark for President? Another Con Job from the Neo-Cons
By Wayne Madsen

Let it never be said the neo-conservatives are not persistent. That's why they must be rounded up by the FBI and charged with violating the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) statutes. But let's save that issue for another time.

The latest trick of the neo-cons is running retired General Wesley Clark for President as a Democrat. But not just any Democrat -- a "New Democrat." The same bunch that are pushing Joe Lieberman's candidacy are obviously hedging on their bets and want to have Clark in the race as a potential vice presidential candidate (to ensure their continued influence in a future Democratic administration of Howard Dean, John Kerry, or Dick Gephardt) or as a "go-to" candidate in the event that Lieberman stumbles badly in the first few Democratic primaries next year.

The "New Democrats" (neo-cons) are as much masters at the perception management (lying) game as their GOP counterparts (Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Donald Rumsfeld). Clark's presidential candidacy announcement in Little Rock is one warning sign. This city is a sort of "Mecca" for the neo-con Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) and its main nurturers, Al From and Bruce Reed. It was from Little Rock where the DLC propelled a little known governor named Bill Clinton into the White House. And although Clinton did not turn out exactly as conservative as the DLC hoped for, his support for globalization and selected use of U.S. military power abroad were neo-con keystone successes.

<</ SNIP>>

[sabra]

1. We need to be carefull...

<<
Anyone else having a hard time with this Madsen stuff?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=88066&mesg_id=88066

>>

[New Earth]

2. yes

also getting attacked for having a hard time with it!!!

[sabra]

4. I admit that I want it to be true...

but we need to be very weary of these kinds of reports. I'd rather concentrate on the irregularities we already know of, and also follow the statistical reports from UC Berkeley and Freeman.

[sabra]

5. dupe

[212demop]

6. I know!

Having doubts, or suggesting people like Madsen or their theories be scrutinized, does not make one un-democratic. I'm seeing so many attacks on people with contrary opinions to the majority on threads it makes me afraid to post!

[Eloriel]

23. You should also remember

that some of us have been around here for a long while. Madsen isn't exactly an unknown quantity to us.

I'm personally still not convinced myself -- but NOT because I doubt Madsen's credibility.

IMO it doesn't do a lot of good for folks who are relatively new here and obviously not that knowledgeable about the culture of DU to be too strident in their denunciations of what they may not be familiar with. I see a LOT of newbies getting a lot of things wrong, simply because they've not been around as many blocks as some of the rest of us have.

Put another way (more tangibly), most DUers already HAVE scrutinized Madsen. You've not been here for the nearly 4 years DU has existed, so that you don't know all that is understandable, but it does behoove you and other new DUers to consider the possibility now and then that you may not know what you're talking about sometimes, esp. if you start getting attacked for your concerns by people who have been here for quite a while. It's not that all DUers agree on everything, not by a long shot, just that there's a common history and some common understandings held by a good many of us.

Perhaps if you voice your concerns more as questions rather than pronouncements? (Not having seen the posts of yours that may have made you shy to post further, I don't know if this advice is applicable, but I'll toss it out there anyway.)

[212demop]

44. Point taken.

Actually I haven't had problems in terms of getting attacked personally. I've just noticed reading the boards lately that the tenor seems to be more-- I don't know how to articulate this-- sensitive? maybe... hmmm... So that I've seen it happen to others on a dime, which does inhibit me from expressing myself more openly for fear of inciting anger by people who have been around here forever and are impatient with relative newcomers like myself.

But I understand what you are saying. Still, look at it from my end... It's hard to come into a conversation mid-way through. It's hard work. Very hard work. :)

[sabra]

45. You shouldn't be afraid to post!

I posted this thread, and took a few jabs for it. But it's all good... If you have something to say, let your voice be heard!

The truth is out there, just need to go and find it...

[212demop]

46. I just read through the whole thread and you certainly did take a few!

Thanks....

:)

[sabra]

47. I hope to see some threads started by you soon...

:-)

[Andromeda]

70. I've been around here forever...

and people have such strong opinions on DU it's hard not to stir up opposition sometimes.

Don't be afraid to express your opinion because that's what this board is all about. Even people who are like-minded about most things have areas of disagreement.

I think people are "sensitive" (good word) because a lot of trolls come on DU to make trouble and tempers usually flare when that happens. They are usually ferreted out eventually but sometimes they do inflict a lot of hurt.

Hope most of your experiences are positive on DU!

[sabra]

76. Thanks for the post...

I didn't want to rub anyone the wrong way with the post, just thought the article was worth discussion...

[genius]

53. Clark made mstakes: depleted uranium, School of the Americas

His refusal to acknowledge that depleted uranium could have a harmful effect and his speech at the School of the Americas made Clark a questionable figure. If he had changed his mind and expressed opposition to depleted uranium or had condemned the SoA, I would have been more convinced that he was on the up and up. His son is really nice.

[StClone]

3. Clark?

Madsen? Didn't he pass docs to Rather? Kidding but just wondering if this is a set-up or other trick.

[sabra]

7. Dunno

Just forwarding an article that I saw awhile back written by Madsen, how you want to take it is up to you...

[mostly_lurking]

8. OK, I know I'm risking being labeled a troll,,,

But I am going to say it -- Madsen is a serious nut case. Unless you want to be hopelessly labeled as the "loony left" we should quickly kill any connection to him or his theories.

[BTEagle]

9. madsen

i don't think this sort of finger pointing within the party is helpful

[sabra]

11. Then how should we handle the report? n/t

[pointsoflight]

12. I suggest you look at his background and career.

He may take on stories no one else wants to touch, but he's not a nut case.

[Straight Shooter]

26. We get labeled "loony left" for pointing out that bush is not a Christian

It doesn't take much to push that Republican media button. Either we're "loony left" or we're "tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists."

Hell with them. Labels don't matter. Evidence matters, and I don't care what the source of the evidence is, as long as it proves true.

[Joe Chi Minh]

32. As you suspect,

many, I feel sure, would indeed say that you are a troll; and they might may even go further and see *you* as the serious nut-case you label Madsen.

[jamboi]

10. So he obviously has a negative opinion of Clark. So what? n/t

[sabra]

14. I wanted people to be aware of one of his earlier reports

There are some members here who think very highly of Clark, and might want to know about Madsen's opinion towards him. In addition, I just want members to take these reports with a grain of salt...

[jamboi]

17. I think highly of Clark too. I think EVERYONE'S opinion should be salted.

test all things and judge for yourself.

[sabra]

19. Good motto

"test all things and judge for yourself."

I agree fully.

[Eloriel]

27. You know, sabra

You're racking up quite a record here at DU. I don't recall a single one of your threads that I've seen that I didn't consider problematic in some way -- usually seemed intentionally inflammatory.

We've had so many great new DUers since the election, and you're the only one whose threads have struck me this way. Isn't that odd?

[sabra]

36. Eloriel, I want to have a reputation...

but not as some on who considered problematic. I am sorry to see that you think of me in that way. I was a long time "watcher" here at DU, several months before the election, and decided to join after 11/2. My intentions are not to cause any problems, rather forward pertinent articles, discuss topics, etc...

Eloriel, I respect your presence on this board, and I hope I can change your opinion of me...

<<
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=59569

sabra (201 posts) Thu Nov-18-04 12:22 AM
Original message
How many of these ~8k people got to vote?

Eloriel (1000+ posts) Thu Nov-18-04 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #1

2. What a fabulous idea --


wonder if Ohioans (see Ohio State Forum) would be interested in such a project?

>>

[Joe Chi Minh]

35. Do you

share Clark's esteem for the School of the Americas, sabra? I believe it has now been renamed, but their motto in the minds of most God-fearing people will surely remain, "service with a rictus".

Do you think that elevates Clark above Madsen? I think we should be told.

[Clark2008]

71. Clark's "esteem" for the School of Americas?

Give me a fucking break.
http://clark04.com/issues/soa/

And, Sabra - this is one of the issues that concerns me regarding Madsen. There are others - most of which are simply that he's so far left that middle America, the people who actually inhabit Ohio, for example, won't buy a word the man has to say.

That's my biggest complaint. Period.

[Joe Chi Minh]

78. You clearly don't

deserve a break. (vide T P Barnum)

What on earth do you think that newly named School of the Americas is for! To prevent the countries in South and Central America from becoming too right wing (you made your sympathies clear)! Do you really think maybe Mr Chavez will be the beneficiary of their assistance.

It's like renaming Mengele's concentration camp as the Humanitarian Institute for Medical Research. Think of the atrocities in Guatemala, Chile and Aregntina - to name just three - sponsored and indirectly perpetrated by those you and General Clark would dismiss as fringe players, mavericks.

[New Earth]

13. i don't think he's a nutcase

and i don't think this story should go unnoticed. i think it just needs to be proceeded with caution, as any of the stories coming out right now regarding the election.

[AuntPatsy]

15. Actually I took the time to delve even further and found him to

be anything but a nutcase. As one poster said, he obviously takes on stories many won't touch. Some might not like hearing his thoughts but I for one am giving him the benefit of the doubt..

We have to realize people that just because someone calls themselves Democrats does not a true dem make. I found it telling the sign in name he used. He has no love for Clinton that is a given since in essence Clinton was one of those that has been suggested in having something to do with Cas's supposed suicide.

And it is surely interesting that Clinton has been someone linked to the Bushies but I would bet that many top officials could make such a claim, does not mean that one would follow another's rhetoric just because of an association but it surely is interesting what continues to be ignored...

Take Lieberman for example, he is in my eyes more Rep than Dem and yet he continues to deny such. I believe the vote on the floor for this country's spending bill should be a wake up call for everyone...

One thing about what I believe the Dem party to be about is to agree to disagree, so why should we always rally around those that we only agree with one hundred percent..

Might as well be Rep lapdogs if such is the case..

[Duncan]

16. The Neo-Cons smeared Clark from the right

Madsen seems to have smeared him "from the left". Seems like Madsen might be "Another Con Job from the Neo-Cons". I suggest that nobody waste energy on Madsen with all the other stuff that IS verifiable coming to the fore. Let Madsen's theory grow its own legs before you lend it yours.

[righteous1]

18. What's Olbermanns take on Madsen?

[sabra]

20. Check out his blog...

<<
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/

NEW YORK • November 27, 2004 | 12:43 p.m. ET

Reportedly According to Apparently Informed Sources (Keith Olbermann)

>>

[righteous1]

24. Thanks for the link

It's obvious from reading this that he doesn't have an awful lot of credence in this guy

[ailsagirl]

64. Just went to Olbermann's blog...

and I see he has posted a story about Dick Ebersol. I googled Ebersol and found around 1400 entries concerning the plane crash he was in. It's a very sad story. Though Ebersol survived the crash, both pilots and one of his sons perished (the other was OK). But, at the risk of sounding crass, I have to point out that the media are ALL OVER this story but do you think that any of them are on the voter fraud story? It just made me realize how AVID they can be when it concerns a particular sort of story (usually tragedy)... and how silent they can be otherwise.

Just a thought...

[NVMojo]

73. good point, ailsagirl!

Our media sucks nationally and there are few reporters working for corporate media firms who are really allowed to be neutral and investigate a story and let the reader or listener think for themselves anymore. We've been mainstreamed.

[AntiFascist]

77. Exactly the point...

which is why we are depending on info. leaked to former intelligence agents, whether or not it all be true. If the truly investigative reporters would follow up on some of these leads I would be truly happy.

[PeterPan]

21. he's written extensively on 911 and silencing dissent

for example
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/082202_withercongress.html

i find him credible

[Stahl]

25. Speculation

I just wish what is the agenda of Bush, I mean if (emphasis on if) you steal an election and effectively commit treason, you don't just do it for nothing. There has to be some higher purpose.

During his first term US invaded Iraq and strenghtened their forces in M-E and I don't think that even Bush Jr. is that stupid that he has not read his fathers book why he didn't invade Iraq after the first war. Reasons were largely the same why US is currently bogged in there.

But if US is going to establish hegemony in M-E for whatever purpose, the emotional unity of americans after 9/11 is in my understanding not anymore enough to whip people up for another war. If the election was indeed stolen and Bush is ruthless enough, the only thing that possibly could get american people in emotional stupor enough would be another terror strike, blamed on Iran. It also would, in their mind also perhaps unite the polarized people of US.

I'm sure many of you have already thought of this and I acknowledge this is very uncredible speculation, but I just thought what _could_ be possible with treasonous president who would stop at nothing to achieve his aims.

[righteous1]

29. Are you suggesting that the Bush

administration would orchestrate an attack on there own people just for an excuse for an invasion of Iran??? I hope not, because that is beyond "out there"

[Joe Chi Minh]

37. See below.

"Righteous1"!

"My"! as the girl in "Just shoot Me" said, when the man at her door identified himself as Special Agent Bailey (or whatever), "Someone thinks highly of himself".

[Stahl]

39. Re: righteous1

"I hope not, because that is beyond "out there""

I fail to see difference getting your countrymen killed in unjust (albeit this in aftersight) invasion of Iraq, if he knew that Iraq actually posed no threat and had no connection to those cardboard boxcutting knife -wielding terrorists. And if he read his fathers book, Bush likely knew what would happen in Iraq.

As said, I wish I knew his agenda. Invasion of Iran may not be in it, but there has to be something because stealing elections is awfully risky and you don't do it for the sake of it. Stealing elections would just be a vehicle to get to his agenda, not the agenda itself.

I like to follow US media and they have focused awful lot of attention to Iran lately, discrediting european attempts of negation. Even Fox can be awfully informative if you can read it correctly.

[righteous1]

42. You steal elections for one

reason and one reason only POWER. What you choose to do with that power is anybody's guess. But to presume to be the all seeing oracle that would know what and how that power would be used is sheer folly and the height of arrogance. The smarter the pundant the less likely you will see them speculate as to a persons motives and hence future actions especially sinister actions because the realize better than stupid people like me that that sort of pregnostication is dangerous and generally incorrect. The folks who generaly do this sort of star gazing are ones with a bit of information a lot of sheer hatred and a huge chip on their shoulder. It tends to be irrational convoluded logic and sheer bluster

[Stahl]

50. Feel free to disagree

"What you choose to do with that power is anybody's guess. But to presume to be the all seeing oracle that would know what and how that power would be used is sheer folly and the height of arrogance".

As is obviously the case with those political analysts that are doing just that, speculating what Bush will do in his second term? The consensus in this forum seems to be that the elections were stolen. Feel free to assume he stole them because he is merely an evil man who just wants to control US of A for the sake it next four years. Maybe he is.

"The smarter the pundant the less likely you will see them speculate as to a persons motives and hence future actions especially sinister actions because the realize better than stupid people like me that that sort of pregnostication is dangerous and generally incorrect".

Didn't Aristotle say that wise man is able to entertain a thought without adopting it? Or are there limits to freedom of speech in US because some things just might be too dangerous to speculate?

Besides, I actually believe Bush genuinely wants to make America great, just perhaps his methods might be in odds with morality of most. Same thing goes on with Russia in Chechnya, France in Africa and at least yet non-violently with Japan and China in Siberia. I don't consider US to be to better or worse than most countries even with Bush or not.

Europe didn't want US to go to war with Iraq because they had excellent oil contracts with Saddam that would be voided as soon as US invaded.

If I'd be looking for a motive for the assumptions I drew earlier, now it is Iran who in turn is flirting with europeans, there has been talk that they would establish an oil bourse with european currency which would be catastrophic for US. Conveniently europeans resolved the nuclear materials enrichment issue making it more difficult to justify another war for US there now.

There are reasons why some european nations would like to see US in turmoil, but it is very likely that US doesn't allow this to happen and thus, it will be prevented by any means necessary. Emphasis on last four words.

[AntiFascist]

79. Much of your argument makes sense to me...

and welcome to DU Stahl.

Has anyone noticed that with the signing of the EU constitution that the US status as the sole reigning superpower may now be challenged? European nations are now dealing with Iran in a similar way that was proposed by Kerry-Edwards, and which was criticized by PNAC. The goal of PNAC is to ensure that the 21st century be the new "American" century. If Iran, as the number 2 oil producer, threatens to change the currency basis for its oil over to the Euro this may be viewed as nothing less than a security risk to the current administration, and centrist Democrats may go along with this. Pending security risks may trump legitimizing election results, in the eyes of some, and result in putting democracy on hold, in the eyes of many others.

[Stahl]

82. Thanks for the welcome

"Has anyone noticed that with the signing of the EU constitution that the US status as the sole reigning superpower may now be challenged?"

EU has signed it yes, but the constitution needs to be ratified in all countries either by parliament or popular voting.

Latter is a huge problem, because the constitution absolutely needs to be ratified by all larger EU countries and I could bet there is massive mobilization by eurosceptics (I wonder if this is the right word) to block it from ever realizing. I read the constitution once and with all its 300 hard to read pages it truly is testament to the bureaucracy of EU, not at all like elegant constitution of US so it won't be hard to get people feel negative about it.

Even I who am very pro unification was extremely skeptical about it, though I later saw ratification as better of two bad choices. Unless they get Diebold to provide voting machines to Britain and France, I believe it won't be ratified and EU will be in crisis. Well, who wants to be superpower and hate-magnet anyhow.

[googly]

59. You put in words what I was thinking but dismissed it as farfetched

syaing to myself, nah no one can be that diabolical.

[Stahl]

62. I too hope its far fetched

I hope I am wrong, but the world politics are really getting unbalanced everywhere. It's like watching a car crash. US is certainly not even the most ruthless player though it gets most of the attention.

I really am tempted to think that Bush got himself re-elected because he or his major supporters whoever they might be aren't finished in Middle-East. Anyways if europeans force the US to war against Iran, I think it will require much more than Fox propaganda to get people accepting it.

But if US government willingly sacrifices its soldiers and citizens in Iraq knowing from the start that the war was unjustified, I'm inclined to believe morals have little to do how they would start this another war. Second World War is filled with these examples.

There are of course alternatives to fake terror strike which I think would be most risky but also most effective way to get people on warpath. For example after Arafat died, I believe those who think possible scenarios asked themselves "what can we make of this?".

It could be insurgents flooding from Iranian border to Iraq with the support of iranian government but I don't think that would be enough. Nor is the uranium enrichments if iranians and europeans play their cards right. Maybe faked shock strike by Iran to Israel, which proceeds to war US alongside. Maybe something else.

Heck, european leaders didn't want another Bush term partly because they have their interests in Middle-East as well but not troops. Looking how world politics are getting more unbalanced and polarized, I thougth that maybe even Bush and his main supporters might have foreseen this and thinking the(ir) benefits of US applying "the end justifies the means" -principle (including stolen elections).

[LiberalAndProud]

68. He may have been aware of his father's reasons for not invading Baghdad.

But I do believe Jr is exactly that stupid. The man does not read, does not consider, and does not think.

[Minstrel Boy]

31. And Madsen's take on Olbermann:

"being an ESPN sportscaster may not have been the best experience to judge such a long lead investigative story."

[high density]

33. While Madsen is out in fantasy land, Olbermann raises good points

...and that's the best argument he has to refute them?

[Carl Brennan]

55. Please tell me how Madsen is out in fantasy land. Thank You.

[rinsd]

34. Keith says hold the phone until confirmation....

....and Madsen makes fun of his qualifications?

Because internet journalist quoting unnamed sources is better?

Someone wants their 15 minutes.....

[NVMojo]

74. while his sources are "unnamed" to us, Madsen knows who they are.

[Carl Brennan]

54. Nice hit MB. Oberman is not versed in the history of things like

BCCI,Saudis, Enron and the Bushies. The more I see those who negate Madsen, even those who have been at DU for some time, don't really have much of a theoretical framework based on the history. IMHO a historical conciousness is essential to understanding how the BFEE operates.

That is not to say that Oberman isn't doing good things. I certainly think he is.

[googly]

60. What does BFEE stand for again please? TIA

[Carl Brennan]

61. Bush Family Evil Empire. Welcome to DU

:toast:

[Clark2008]

72. Says who?

I think he's much better versed in all of these things because he adores the blogs and he reads them avidly. He's a fan of how Watergate was broken and sounds like he takes his cues from old-school, gumshoe journalism.

And, one thing's for sure, he's probably better versed on all these things than you are on how to spell his name.

(Sorry that was snarky - but your post implies the man isn't aware of these connections and doesn't have the J-School background to separate the tin foil from the meat. I contend he does.)

[Carl Brennan]

81. ouch

I think.

[TruthIsAll]

22. WAYNE MADSDEN HAS BEEN A GREAT WRITER FOR OUR CAUSE...

ON THE NET FOR AS LONG AS I CAN RECALL.

HE IS ENTITLED TO HIS OPINION ON WESLEY CLARK/NEOCONS.

AS FOR HIS LATEST INFO, I TRUST HIM 100%.

I JUST HOPE HE'S RIGHT.

[progressoid]

28. A little skepticism is healthy and sometimes gets you a black eye

The troll/freeper accusations will always fly when something like this comes up. Thats the fun of having an open forum.

I hope his sources are legit on this one. (Fingers crossed) He also had sources before the election that said b* was going to invade Iran to shore up his sinking poll numbers. Thank god that didn't happen.

[sabra]

38. Thanks, I just took a few jabs... n/t

[high density]

30. Thanks for this

I was highly skeptical after that weird $29 million article, but after reading this article I know I can ignore Madsen for good. What a sadly uninformed person he appears to be.

[shib]

41. Skepticism is good...

Skepticism in regards to anyone is good. Generally speaking, anyone whom Michael Ruppert is willing trust (FTW) I'm willing to listen to. I've read a good deal of Wayne Madsen's work and not known him to be a 'honeypot'. In other words, usually he is not full of shit.

Never buy into anything but you cannot dismiss the man because he has a negative opinion of Wesley Clark.

[sabra]

43. My intentions weren't to dismiss the man..

I just wanted to make people aware of the Clark article, to get a full picture. Others have posted links to his books and other articles which does the same.

I don't think he is full of shit, because one needs to be very creative to come up with all of that :-)

[high density]

51. He's calling Wes Clark a neocon

And if Madsen had a shred of an idea who Wes Clark is, he would know that this supposed "neocon" was against the Iraq war from the start. Madsen is uninformed and is using his ignorance to libel Clark. He's even comparing Wes Clark to Hitler's Luftwaffe in part of that article! Plus the bullshit from General Hugh Shelton that Madsen holds in such high regard was nothing more than nasty politics from a surrogate of John Edwards.

This article is trash, as is this twenty nine million dollar bullshit.

[NVMojo]

75. well, and then there are "agent provacatuers" ....

[Minstrel Boy]

40. "America's Nightmare," a collection of Madsen's essays,

is on the shelf above my monitor. Those who don't know Madsen, but think they know enough now to dismiss him, would do themselves a favour to read it.



From the Amazon editorial review:

"It is said that 'the truth hurts, yet the truth will set you free.' John Stanton and Wayne Wayne Madsen drill down to the nerve and deliver the full story about America’s Media & Language, War & Weapons, Internal Affairs and a variety of other issues pointing out the US 'crisis without precedent' that was wrought by the US Presidential election of 2000 followed by 9/11.

"At a time when the American people and, indeed, the people of the world, find that facts are in such short supply, this book is a must read. In times such as these, the truth is one of the greatest of all casualties. This book provides quick First Aid to those who seek relief from the propaganda and disinformation that flood the major information channels."
-- Cynthia McKinney, US Representative, Georgia

[AntiFascist]

48. Maybe...

we should evaluate Clark more closely. There are plenty of necon sympathizers within the Democratic Party, more than you may be comfortable with.

Case in point: after forwarding the content of Madsen's article to one of my Democratic senators, pointing out that perhaps election corruption needs to be further investigated, I received a canned response about the future of Iraq. It explained why we need to continue fighting in Iraq. Senator Feinstein is a member of the Select Committee on Intelligence.

[sabra]

49. Anything is possible...

but we also need to consider it's probability. But history has shown some crazy things to happen. So I guess we'll have to see how things unfold?

[high density]

52. Maybe you should read Clark's positions on things

Because he is not a neocon sympathizer! Either that or he has been running a elaborate con job for the past couple of years.

http://www.clark04.com/issues

[AntiFascist]

63. Targets in common with neocons:

This was pulled from Clark's speech "General Wesley Clark Outlines Success Strategy in Iraq"

<snip>
"The hundred tons of loosely guarded nuclear bomb-making material and bioweapons in Russia presents a far more tempting target for terrorists. But this Administration has not made that a priority. The nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea were more advanced and more threatening than Iraq's, but for months they paid little attention. Their actions made no strategic sense; they downplayed the greater threats, and exaggerated the lesser one.
<snip>

Obviously he wants to distance himself from the planning of the Bush administration, but Iran, North Korea and even Russia are all prime targets in the master neocon plan.

[high density]

65. Kerry also talked about the Russian nuclear material, Iran, and N. Korea

Is he, too, a neocon?

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/national_security/strategy.html

[AntiFascist]

67. What defines a neocon?

Although there was an editorialist who once accused Kerry of being a neocon, I would disagree. PNAC has defined the neocon agenda as involving preemptive military action and regime change, i.e. there is little room for negotiation. On the other hand, Kerry-Edwards' plans are filled with negotiation and settlement. Few would disagree that nuclear bomb-making capability is a problem in these countries, the issue is how to resolve the problem.

I doubt that Clark would be willing to comment one way or the other on PNAC. Kerry-Edwards, on the other hand, are criticized on the PNAC site itself for their plans involving negotiation in relation to Iran:

http://newamericancentury.org/iran-20040902.htm

[West Coast Democrat]

56. If Clark is a neo-Con, why didn't Michael Moore realize this?

I don't think he'd support a neo-Con.

[Carl Brennan]

57. Here is another interesting snip from that article.

More interestingly is how General Clark's Bosnia strategy ultimately goes full circle. According to Washington K Street sources, the law firm that established the Bosnia Defense Fund was none other than Feith and Zell, the firm of current Pentagon official and leading neo-con Douglas Feith. Feith's operation at Feith and Zell was assisted by his one-time boss and current member of Rumsfeld's Defense Policy Board, Richard Perle. Both Feith and Perle advised the Bosnian delegation during the 1995 Dayton Peace talks. The chief U.S. military negotiator in Dayton was Wesley Clark.

Madsen doesn't make frivolous claims.

[Minstrel Boy]

58. Those disturbed that Wayne Madsen is not a DNC flag waver

need to WAKE UP to the fact that election fraud transcends Kerry's campaign, Clark's bona fides or any other partisan concern.

Forget your primary battles. Hell, forget even Democrat or Republican (see the website of Republican IT Auditor Chuck Herrin for an example of what I mean). If you don't rise above this squabbling, pull yourselves together and get in the goddamn streets, you can forget America.

[Syd_]

66. I know that we all would like Madsen's story to be true

but there is a real danger here. Our being even remotely involved in this could cost us all of our credibility. If you remember what some of the mainstream media remarked about bloggers and conspiracy theories, then you must get my point.

Do you realize that "Castelero" could be setting us up to look like a bunch of "crazies" -- He has given no direct answers, no evidence and his tale grows more and more like a bad novel. He's made some of you feel that you are "in" on a big plot to save Democracy and some of you are finding it satisfying and exciting.

I'm not debunking his story. I'm not convinced either. Just be careful that we don't lose our credibility. How do you know for certain that Castelero is Madsen? Be careful. My usual blog considers me the conspiracy theorist of the blog and I'm not buying this story. We should be too gullible. We can be careful, have patience, wait a few days and see if Madsen's story proves out before we start spouting his story.

If we lose our credibility it will undermine Bev Harris and all the others working on exposing the voter fraud. Guilt by association. Be a bit more skeptical and be careful. He's sure getting a lot of information here.


I looked at that article about Clark being a neocon. It doesn't matter whether you supported Clark or hated him. My point is that even if the basic premise of the article is valid, it is filled with disinformation, some of it small stuff, some of it big and easily verified. IF the basic premiss of the article were to be true, Madsen defeats his own purpose with tortured half-facts.

For example:

"Now enter "Arkansan" Wesley Clark. Like Hillary Clinton, Clark is a Chicago transplant to Little Rock. . . "

Well, if moving from Chicago to Little Rock at AGE THREE means Clark is a transplant, then it is a fact, but it's really twisted. The story about British General Michael Jackson is true except for the fact that Clark had given Jackson orders to prevent the Russions from taking over control of the Pristina Airport by parking large vehicles on the runway. That's hardly a provocative action. General Jackson's response that he wasn't going to be responsible for beginning World War III was demonstrated to be something of an overreaction when the action was finally carried out by others and prevented the division of another country as had happened with Germany.

During the primaries Shelton was military advisor for John Edwards. The fact is that Shelton had disliked Clark for many years. The reason for Shelton's antipathy of Clark was Clark's going over his head directly to Clinton for orders. I am not defending Clark here, but as reinforcement for what I've sent, I'll point out that Clark did receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

That's enough to illustrate my point. IF Clark was part of a Neocon plot, then it could have been approached more responsibly. I am not defending Clark. I don't know. The more general theory is that Clark was promoted by the DNC to knock out Dean in order to benefit the insiders. I don't know what the truth is. I do know that I wouldn't trust Madsen to get things straight responsibly.

I am concerned about our losing our crediblity by supporting Madsen's theory prematurely.

But, hey! I haven't been posting here that long, so what do I know?

[Minstrel Boy]

69. "this could cost us all of our credibility" With who?

Who, besides us, gives a damn what we think?

You're worried about what "the mainstream media remarked about bloggers and conspiracy theories." Let me tell you something: you'd better first worry about conspiracies, and you better not worry at all about being called names for it.

The US "mainstream media" will never respect the democratic left until it is forced to by a new fairness doctrine, so stop troubling yourself about what it thinks. You'll never be "mainstream" enough for its liking until you're one of them.

"I haven't been posting here that long, so what do I know?"

Post count is no reflection of wisdom. But you have shown, by speculating Wayne Madsen "could be setting us up to look like a bunch of 'crazies,'" that you don't know Wayne Madsen. And I think you would benefit by reading more of him.

[jamboi]

80. Madsen DU Q&A posted on web site. Link

The compilation of the Madsen 11/28 DU Q&A the Madsen has been posted at

http://www.legjoints.com/WayneMadsen/

Thanks to Roger_Otip!