Proposed: Let's Support Wayne Madsen

[democraticinsurgent]

By that I DO NOT mean that we have to accept everything that he writes or has written. Healthy skepticism, debate, and differences of opinion are part of the engine that drives this wonderful website.

However, Jamboi's efforts to bring him together with Olberman and into DU were amazingly successful. Are we going to drive him off like we did with Dem Strategist?

Let's look at where we are. Two weeks away from the Electoral College vote and we're not close to flipping either Ohio or Florida to Kerry. The RW machines in those two states are not going to help us one little bit and we do not yet have any single thing that's going to turn things around in a hurry, so far as I know.

Madsen's work may well be the key to bring the element of criminality into play, and that may be the only thing that gets MSM attention. All the other efforts are important but nothing we or BBV or anyone else is doing has the scope of Madsen's story.

Most of us also agree that Bushco is guilty of all sorts of criminal behavior. A lot of it is on the record (October Suprise, Iran/Contra). A lot more is supported by a great body of evidence.

That Madsen is perhaps connecting the biggest dots of our lifetime should be of great significance to each and every one of us. Can we all try to keep an open mind and stop bashing him, at least until we see where this is going?

[noclonyofthechimp]

1. Well said. I agree

[Quakerfriend]

3. Thank you

for putting this into the proper context. I whole heartedly agree with you!

[jamboi]

8. Yes, no uncritical support, but w/ healthy skepticism testing all allegati

ons and judging them on their own merits. That has been and will be my approach. We could turn over a *lot* of rocks doing research that could further this investigation if enough of us decide to work together on it.

[genius]

25. Absolutely. He may be our best hope for exposing the truth.

I've heard only great things about his past articles.

[Stand and Fight]

2. Absolutely agreed. n/t

[smartvoter]

4. Agreed, but we shouldn't put all our eggs in one basket.

We know there are problems that haven't been explained. Let's not get so caught up in one possible explanation that if it becomes discredited, it discredits the entire questioning of the results.

[BlueDog2u]

5. I vote for this

Healthy skepticism is a good thing. Overzealous debunking is not. Let's understand the difference and defend it. I salute Wayne Madsen for everything he has done. I believe him to be a man of integrity and courage, and we should do everything we can to help him test his theory, sharpen the case, and discover anything he needs help with.

[BlueDog2u]

6. I vote for this

sorry for the duplicate post. But as they say, "vote early and vote often."

[grumpy old fart]

7. Just brings ridicule...

responsible journalism is what is needed, not some more cock-eyed conspiracy theorists. Facts. Credible sources. That's what's needed. Olberman is right.

[Minstrel Boy]

11. Is it still "conspiracy theory" when he has a copy of the check,

and whistleblowers as sources?

Just wondering, what kind of "responsible journalism" is needed here?

"Olbermann is right"

Madsen is right about Olbermann:

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

[Ducks In A Row]

15. he could have video taped confessions by bush, and the freepers still

would refuse to believe it.

I support him and hope he has time later to come back and post again

[AntiFascist]

12. Is the media being responsible?

It seems that anyone bringing forth evidence against the administration is not only open to ridicule, but will lose their job. I hope British or other foreign journalists are now in the process of investigating and preparing reports.

[pbartch]

9. I totally agree with you. There is TOO MUCH bashing between Democrats

Treating each other with respect and the way we would want to be treated is the way I think we should react.

There is TOO much bashing! Sometimes I think I'm on a stock board.

[Vidar]

10. Agreed, anyone that fights for us at this point.

[KoKo]

13. How do you suggest we support him?

:shrug:

[democraticinsurgent]

17. For One Thing, By Not Disrespecting Him

Which is something I'm seeing way too much of. Trumad's anti-Madsen thread is huge and bringing out all sorts of nasty comments. It took guts for the guy to come on DU at let us ask questions. If DU is going to become the force that it's capable of, we all need to practice manners with guests if nothing else.

Let's face it, none of us know the truth here. I'm willing to bet that Madsen is closer to it than any of us. Do you think he'd be saying he's working with Kerry's people if he's not? If he's considered credible enough for the Kerry campaign that ought to at least yield grudging respect from each and every DU'er (lurking freepers unfortunately will do what they do).

That's really all I'm asking. We don't all have to agree or embrace his theory. Let's just be patient and respectful.

[jamboi]

31. Absolutely! Well put. n/t

[NVMojo]

32. I agree with democraticinsurgent

"by not disrespecting him" and use Trumad's posts for example.

[americanwhothinks]

38. Respect for FACTS doesn't imply disrespect of any individual

To maintain a critical distance to any/all narratives that are not in the present moment supported by facts

is to respect the work, the project, the aims of DU.

yes, i'm new here, but i'm 38 years old and i understand-- as a general life principle-- the way serious efforts can be undermined, derailed, mitigated, compromised, watered down-- by lots of hype and talk that is not yet a direct expression of something solid.

much of the analysis here is sound, and it comes right out of the facts of this election.

stories embraced because of the alleged credibility of the source

are stories. they ARE "theories" and they will do no one any good until they are substantiated.

respect the substantiated stuff-- there's TONS of that here at DU!!

that's my take on respect here at DU!

[Shalom]

14. YES YES YES

It's amazing how careful Dems are about absolute certification of the "facts"; the truth is that all the Repugnant lies by the Swift Slimers actually hurt Kerry, no matter how they were eventually discounted...Repugs don't worry about "facts", so it is an asymmetrical battle that hurts Democrats.

Let us sling every piece of slime we can at Bushitler, whether a particular is totally true or not - since no matter what we accuse him of, he has actually done things much much worse, which we all know even if we cannot prove it in a court of law.

Think about how they nailed Al Capone, for tax evasion....Let's assume Capone was not actually guilty of tax evasion - who the hell cares ? Capone deserved to be nailed to the wall, and got off easy.

[dzika]

16. I agreed. Let's support him

until he gives a reason to do otherwise. So far, I think he has been as transparent as you could hope a person in his position would be.

[rdmccur]

18. support?

What kind of support? In what ways can we support him? Not a rhetorical question. Some of us may discover something somewhere or have some connection (though I doubt many of us do) that could help him. Other ways to support?

[ClassWarrior]

20. I think they're saying let's not be nasty to the guy. With that...

...I wholeheartedly agree.

NGU.

[Alizaryn]

19. Well said

The ONE thing I heard last night that he thought might be of a help is to research which of the voting machine companies used outsourced technicians. He seems to think this is a key that will help us.

I will keep trying but I took a shot at it and could not get anywhere if anyone else can see what they can come up with.

[rdmccur]

21. I recall that as well now that you mention it.

That's a good one to research.

[rdmccur]

22. Bev Harris

Could Bev or some of her folks help us with that one? Seems they have some expertise in the subject matter. I think will send her an e-mail and ask.

[EC]

23. I do really believe

the BCCI had something to do with it,anyway, so I have no problem accepting his report.

[Roger_Otip]

24. i've put a WayneMadsen page up here

http://www.legjoints.com/WayneMadsen

lifted from the DU Q&A

[rdmccur]

26. thanks!

[jamboi]

27. Excellent! Thanks so much! n/t

[jamboi]

28. The link didn't work for me. Maybe it needs tweeking? n/t

[Roger_Otip]

34. sorry - forgot the slash at the end

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

[jamboi]

35. Thanks, for the corrected link... n/t

[jamboi]

29. E-mail from WM re: future Q&As

jamboi writes:

Any possiblity of future DU Q&A?

Maybe after I get my head above the alligators and sharks -- I think my next article will generate much more animated discussion.

wm

[BlackVelvet04]

30. I agree......

I'm sure Mr. Madsen understands a degree of skepticism but I think the least we can do is be respectful and keep an open mind.

[liberal al zib]

33. Wayne Madsen for President.

[jamboi]

36. Anyone who's serious about organizing research on this plz join me here

New, Improved Madsen Research Project Strategy Thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=201

[jamboi]

40. Corrected Link for Madsen Research

Corrected Link for Madsen Research
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=201x6212

[americanwhothinks]

37. Supporting Evidence isn't Bashing Source

I have been skeptical of Madsen story, but this doesn't mean I am "bashing" Madsen.

Seems that the issue here at DU should never be "who is speaking," rather, we should be looking at the quality of the evidence, analysis, interpretation--

Any unified effort to "support Madsen" that doesn't simply mean "support investigation and research/analysis of facts" would not be in DU's interest....

So of course we must support Madsen as another potential purveyor of truth---

but as of now, he has offered only a story. And DU has other "stories" (interpretive narratives-- the "idea" that comes from the numbers) that are grounded, supported, and emerging out of the facts--

this is what I support--- in general, as a new DU'er, and as someone who's convinced that the facts all point to another stolen election!!

[americanwhothinks]

39. And as for what/who is respected here at DU....

To maintain a critical distance to any/all narratives that are not in the present moment supported by facts

is to respect the work, the project, the aims of DU.

yes, i'm new here, but i'm 38 years old and i understand-- as a general life principle-- the way serious efforts can be undermined, derailed, mitigated, compromised, watered down-- by lots of hype and talk that is not yet a direct expression of something solid.

much of the analysis here is sound, and it comes right out of the facts of this election.

stories embraced because of the alleged credibility of the source

are stories. they ARE "theories" and they will do no one any good until they are substantiated.

respect the substantiated stuff-- there's TONS of that here at DU!!

as for individuals-- wayne madsen or anybody else-- i'd say respect isn't at issue here--we're in no position to judge, evaluate, or draw conclusions about each other!!


anyway, that's my take on respect here at DU!