Is there a prevailing opinion about Wayne Madsen?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: if not madsen who is reliable?I vote for Alex Jones

Postby chiggerbit » Sat Apr 08, 2006 11:25 am

My favorite is Robert Parry.<br><br>While we're at it, what's the scoop on Al Martin? I don't see too much of his stuff as he is a subscription writer. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 4/8/06 9:27 am<br></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: if not madsen who is reliable?I vote for Alex Jones

Postby darkbeforedawn » Sat Apr 08, 2006 12:02 pm

I read Madsen and post some of his articles not because I believe every word. However, I do believe more of what he says than many newspapers, including the NYT. For all I know, he is a disinfo agent. I'm just studying what's out there, not trying to make absolute claims. Looking back over the last 10 years, I can see the vicious pattern of papers like the NYT who laid out to us beginning in the mid-90's the terrible "threat" the Muslim world would pose to us and those "training" camps in Afghanistan for the fearsome "suicide" hijackers. Truth be known, these "journalists" were in on the scam to drive the US into "endless" war from the beginning. They were setting up the progaganda machine and pacifying the "lefty" intellectuals by instilling a lot of fear. Same with a lot of other stuff, like the "war on drugs". I used to think they were credible. Not any more. Now I am watching events onfold and maybe Chiggerbit and others are right. He may turn out to be a real disinfo agent. I'll be watching and on the alert this time. <p></p><i></i>
darkbeforedawn
 

Re: why you should be cautious of Madsen

Postby lady lib » Sat Apr 08, 2006 12:27 pm

Here's one quick example of Madsen being loose with the facts with a quote from the Rense article previously cited. <br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The news about Doyle broke after Clifton Bennett, the 19-year old son of Arizona's GOP Senate President Ken Bennett, was charged with <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>sodomizing </strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->18 boys who were between the ages of 11 and 14 at an Arizona youth camp. Bennett and a friend were charged with sodomizing the youths with broom sticks and flashlights. <!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://rense.com/general70/deho.htm">rense.com/general70/deho.htm</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>Now here's what the Arizona Republic had to say about the same event.<br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Two men, including the 18-year-old son of Arizona's Senate president, pleaded guilty Monday to <!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>one count of aggravated assault </strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END-->for shoving broomsticks and flashlights up the rectums of 18 young boys last year.<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0404bennett0404.html">www.azcentral.com/arizona...t0404.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>Now how difficult would it have been to double check the actual charge before writing this piece for Rense? In fact, there's been an outcry here in Arizona about the leniency of the charges and the fact that they didn't include sexual assault.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Many also said they wanted the two men, who were counselors at a Prescott youth camp when the incidents occurred, to face sexual assault charges.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>How did Madsen miss this? Answer: He's either sloppy or he's purposefully sending out disinformation. Either way, caveat emptor so to speak.<br><br> <p></p><i></i>
lady lib
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 2:27 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: why you should be cautious of Madsen

Postby chiggerbit » Sat Apr 08, 2006 12:56 pm

I don't mean to defend Madsen, but I just checked out the definiton of sodomy at OneLook, and I have to say that what is described in the newpaper account of the Arizona charges looks like it meets the definition of sodomy to me, except that it was coerced. Just because it was a broomstick and not a cock does not mean that it wasn't sexual. Take my word for it, that WAS a sexual act, an act of rape, if it was not consensual.<br><br>Quick definitions (sodomy)<br><br><br>noun: anal intercourse committed by a man with a man or woman <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=chiggerbit@rigorousintuition>chiggerbit</A> at: 4/8/06 10:57 am<br></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: why you should be cautious of Madsen

Postby lady lib » Sat Apr 08, 2006 1:11 pm

Right. But they were charged with aggravated assault, rather than sexual assault. <br><br>Edit: Let me just add that the point you're making is exactly why the families of these boys are so outraged. Their children <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>were</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> sodomized. The only point I'm trying to make is that Madsen misreported the charge - not what Bennett actually did. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=ladylib>lady lib</A> at: 4/8/06 11:32 am<br></i>
lady lib
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 2:27 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: why you should be cautious of Madsen

Postby betty a free man » Sat Apr 08, 2006 2:06 pm

I find it strange or funny that WM gets a link on James Wolcott's site. Mr. Wolcott can write up a blue streak and is sort of reveared in the Left's gated-community but I'm not sure how I feel about him too...he was really pushing V for Vendeada...hoping liberals would get all whipped-up into a froth.<br><br>Btw, I just registered (after lurking for a while) and I have to say it is liberating to fill out a forms and just give my real name and active email account, cause why bother trying to make it hard for them when I know they already get to read what I write anyway. <br><br>Plus who would want to steal my identity when I'm so far in the hole? <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :b --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif ALT=":b"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <p></p><i></i>
betty a free man
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Apr 08, 2006 1:56 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: why you should be cautious of Madsen

Postby chiggerbit » Sat Apr 08, 2006 2:18 pm

Gotcha, ll, Madsen should have said "..charged for sodomizing.." instead of "..charged with sodomizing..". <p></p><i></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: why you should be cautious of Madsen

Postby dbeach » Sat Apr 08, 2006 2:35 pm

"I'm just studying what's out there, not trying to make absolute claims. "<br><br>The conditioning of the masses continues..consider youself blessed or very insightful that you did NOT fall victim.<br><br>MOST did..<br><br>The MM is the main perp or prop that holds the mean machine in the public consciousness where a barrage of rummy, bush ,candi ,ducky cheney, bliar ,quennie in her crowns are<br>constantly in your face..massaging your value system<br>and indoctrinating many.<br><br>Selecting truthful info becomes an art and skill<br><br>Not dealing in absolutes may be a great survival mechanism..Madesn is just one who can be guilty of disinfo one day and making some good pts another day...<br><br>The MM is guilty of complicity in the 9/11 crime of the century which is turning out to be the CRIME that rocks the roots of humanity and even leads to its downfall..<br><br>"Remember you were there! <p></p><i></i>
dbeach
 
Posts: 2650
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 7:40 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: why you should be cautious of Madsen

Postby lady lib » Sat Apr 08, 2006 2:43 pm

Chiggerbit, I never intended for this to be a "gotcha." It's not just a matter of semantics when the result is a lighter sentence. <p></p><i></i>
lady lib
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2005 2:27 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: why you should be cautious of Madsen

Postby chiggerbit » Sat Apr 08, 2006 3:42 pm

No, no, sorry ll, didn't mean it that way, just "gotcha, I get it". <p></p><i></i>
chiggerbit
 
Posts: 8594
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 12:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Madsen

Postby robertdreed » Sat Apr 08, 2006 5:04 pm

I don't consider Wayne Madsen to be a peddler of dangerous disinformation on the Internet. <br><br>I don't consider him a fully reliable source, either.<br><br>The reason that I don't consider him to be a dangerous peddler of disinfo is that I haven't known him to put up anything on his board that's so totally off-base that it disgraces anyone who repeats it. <br><br>If he's a pernicious disinformationist, he's still in the process of building his credibility, not exploiting it. <br><br>The reason I don't consider Madsen to be a fully reliable source is due to things like his occasional sloppiness; his oft-trumpeted reliance on "inside sources" who might in fact be feeding him bogus info on occasion; and the fact that much of the content of his website was previously broken by other sources. <br><br>I'd consider him more reliable if some of his wilder allegations were at some point shown to be factual- i.e., the claim that Abu Ghraib videos were being hoarded for a select cabal of perverted voyeurs in high reaches of the Executive branch. I don't think that's out of the question, but hard evidence would help.<br><br>I'll need to review his posts on the Fitzgerald/Plame leak. As I recall, his narrative of that has been largely accurate, and ahead of the curve. <br><br>Anyway, Wayne Madsen is still on my "undecided" list, as far as whether he's a credible Internet journalist. I have to admit, not too many people make the cut beyond that point. <br><br> <p></p><i></i>
robertdreed
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:14 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Madsen and the sodomy case

Postby ewastud » Sun Apr 09, 2006 3:52 am

Lady Lib: I think you are nitpicking a bit here about Madsen. His description of the crime of sodomy was certainly less precise than the newspaper account you quoted, but it was not inaccurate in my opinion. I think you may have missed the real point Madsen was making in his linking that case with others of a similar kind by other GOP, or their kin. Madsen does do that a lot: simplifying the account somewhat to make a more cogent point. I think that is justifiable and ethical. <p></p><i></i>
ewastud
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 4:55 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Madsen

Postby robertdreed » Sun Apr 09, 2006 3:55 am

My preliminary read on Madsen is that I want to like the guy.<br><br>I thought the same thing about Tom Flocco, though, and over time he lost credibility with me. <p></p><i></i>
robertdreed
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 11:14 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Madsen

Postby dbeach » Sun Apr 09, 2006 3:30 pm

who is reliable ?<br> credible ect..<br><br>The MM has been lying for yrs BUT most still watch it.<br><br>not me...I read the local town papers but rarely but the Boston Globe anymore..<br><br>This may be a Madsen thread BUT its not just about Madsen..Its a about a collective effort by the bigplayers to poisoin us slowly witht he arsenic that is the MM<br><br>CNN fax NBC CBS and all the rest.are controlled by BIG BRO<br>and have been for a long time<br><br>millionaire salaries with 5 cent intellects..selling their Citizenry into the modern version of damnation <p></p><i></i>
dbeach
 
Posts: 2650
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 7:40 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)


PreviousNext

Return to Media and Information Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests