Why do we discredit ourselves with the endless Masden Debate?

[saracat]

Olberman is spot on. This violates every rule of journalism. I know this election was stolen, but this is not the way to prove it. Where are the credible people out there? We have too many nut cases running around out there, including , sorry to say, Bev Harris, trying to make a buck off the demise of Democracy. When are people going to start asking for real answers, instead of buying whatever they are told? This is beginning to sound like the Art Bell Show. Can we find someone with "real " evidence please? And can we please have a well known MSM reporter investigating this? Keith Olberman is "reporting"not "investigating. What about Sy Hersh? And what about Bernstien? He hasn't sold out as much as Woodward. We need to do something legitimate nd it may be too late!

[New Earth]

1. i agree

i'm tired of hearing about the Madsen story, it gives me an uneasy feeling.

this Clint Curtis affadavit/story is also making me uneasy, but in a different way..,.kind of on-the-edge-of-your-seat waiting to find out of it's real or not.

Honestly, so far, my good feeling has come from Cliff Arnebeck. Something about him, feels good.

[burn the bush]

4. isn't the affidavit story the same story as the Madsen story? n/t

[ddd3]

35. not the same

from BradBlog:
While we've been working on this story for several days in order to get it right, we had hoped to hold it a bit longer to confirm a few more of the details. As well, we had hoped to allow the Judiciary Committee and others time to comment before making this story widely available.

However, as of late Sunday night, Curtis' story has been reported elsewhere on the Internet by Wayne Madsen. His detailed account references an older, very short affidavit that Curtis had made in regards to the information contained in a self-published book on some of these matters.

While Madsen's article was independently researched and reported -- and offers some very good detail in relation to Curtis, YEI, FDOT and Feeney, much of which that we can confirm -- he then ties those stories to a much grander CIA/Bush family conspiracy.

While we have looked somewhat cursorily over the last several weeks into some of the larger matters which Madsen discusses, and has been reporting on for some time, we cannot confirm any of those grander details as playing any part in this particular story. While his claims may be true, The BRAD BLOG has seen no evidence to support them as being related to the Curtis story at this time.

[jamboi]

43. Wrong! You've misinterpreted Brad's words. I know 4 A fact they are same.

Madsen told me days ago about Curtis. I couldn't say anything about it until Madsen broke it.

[ddd3]

46. thanks for your concern, but

Unless i'm completely misunderstanding the previous post, no, Madsen's affadavit is not the same thing. Brad has a DIFFERENT affadavit, the one that was signed today and posted on his site and at rawstory.com. Brad has been in direct contact with Clin Curtis during all of this.

Madsen's article is a separate, independent investigation into the same story, but he did not have the most recent, more detailed affadaavit.

This is not to take away anything from the work that Madsen has done, but Brad Blog and Madsen aren't working together, and it seemed worth it to clarify.

I quoted directly from the BradBlog in my original post. Brad confirms that he is not working with madsen. I know because I just asked him.

[jamboi]

60. Clint Curtis is only one person.Both Madsen and Brad are talking to Curtis

one story.

[Kralizec]

75. self-deleted

[newyawker99]

77. Hi ddd3!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[clydefrand]

7. I agree. These stories are WILD! Now, do I wish they were

true and could be proved. You betcha, but will they? I somehow doubt it. Now, the one today about Clint Curtis...if his affadavit were filed today with the House Judiciary Committe, how far will that get???? Full of repugs, right. I can't imagine them letting anyone even read the affadavit let alone investigate its contents.

[Stand and Fight]

23. Tsk, tsk...

The Repugs are not participating in this hearing -- only the Democrats headed by the minority leader, John Conyers.

[jamboi]

44. The stories are wild (and quite possibly true). Wild truth will come out

in the long run. We'll have to be patient and move through the investigative phase. This is very much a still-in-investigation story. Not to worry, not to fret, the truth will out.

[Clark2008]

30. You and me both

I was uneasy about Madsen from the get-go, admittedly because I thought he had done an unsubstantiated smear of General Wes in the primaries.

I'm still learning about the Cliff Arnebeck stuff as I scroll through the threads, but, from what I've gathered here and on KO's blog, it looks a bit more thought-out and "court ready." My jury is still out on it, but it's not some wild, crazy link meandering through pools of past conspiracies.

We have to K.I.S.S. for it to gain traction amongst those of us who either don't believe the election was rigged or don't know a thing about it in the first place (which, unfortunately, right now, is most of the voting American public).

[clydefrand]

2. What do you suggest that we do?

"We need to do something legitimate nd it may be too late!"

How do we make the MSM talk about the problems as many posters on here see them? I've sent messages to reporters and newspapers and friends. What else is there for someone who doesn't have the means or knowledge to investigate?

[Old and In the Way]

18. Here's what I suggest.

Start a movement to do a high profile recanvassing of selected precincts in Florida and Ohio. Get the data on affidavit. Let's see if we can validate or refute the actual results.

Seems to me we need to assure ourselves, either way, if we can trust the results and the system. If the results are correct, we need to get more votes the next election. If we won, then we have a case to demand reform now before the 2006 mid-terms.

[jamboi]

45. Cliff Arnebeck is not too late. What we can all do is protest & organize!

[saracat]

59. Arnebeck rocks, but many won't march. 500 in Ohio? GMAFB.

[genius]

3. Right. And if Oberman tells us to worship Bush we should obey.

I don't listen to Keith Oberman but from the postings here, it seems he spends most of his time trying to bring down all those working hard to prove the election was stolen. Marsden is a good guy and he's done a heck of a lot more for us than Oberman ever will.

[LoZoccolo]

6. The election was stolen by invaders from another galaxy.

Their superior technology was used which made it look like there's no way certain states were taken for Bush* by laser adjustment of the vote counting devices. INVISIBLE laser adjustment. Learn to read on the web if you don't believe me.

[jamboi]

53. From planet Freeper, using superior logic, shock and awe! n/t

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[buddysmellgood]

5. Unfortunately, this is how it is done now. MSM only reports what the

internet says. If the Madsen story gets pushed around the net enough, Drudge will pick it up and then the MSM will feel it can be reported.
Madsen at least has a person who is willing to testify. That's pretty real.

[clydefrand]

10. Has the identity of this person been revealed? If so, who is it?

[buddysmellgood]

47. Yes, it's this Curtis fellow. But what we really need are all of these

spooks and unnamed sources to come forward.

[Razorback_Democrat]

8. Sorry to say, but if you don't like it, don't read it! n/t

[intheflow]

9. Greg Palast is MSM and legit.

He's working on it.

[Clark2008]

34. And Palast's former work

lends him some credence that Madsen's doesn't.

Olbermann, too, for that matter.

I don't bow to the God of Olbie, but I do recognize someone who is trying to step through the tin foil to arrive at a simple truth of fact that can be used to discredit this whole election fiasco from the unsecured electronic voting machines to the intimidation of minority voters to the lockdown in Warren County, Ohio for bogus reasons.

TRUST is the issue.

[saracat]

39. He isn't really MSM lie a Woodward or Bernstein.

And BTW I don't like Woodward, before you flame me. Carl Bernstein , though, he would be excellent.

[intheflow]

56. First, I would never flame you, saracat.

I actually like you, you have sense. :pals:

Second, I do think Palast is mainstream. He's a NY Times bestselling author, he does reports for BBC Newsnight which airs on many PBS stations nationwide, and he's written for Harpers and the Washington Post. Those are pretty good credentials from very mainstream media outlets. And better than what Woodward and Bernstein had going for them when they broke the Watergate story.

[saracat]

61. True as far as that goes, but middle America doesn't recognize him.

And when Woodward and Bernstein were reporting, the story was actually reported as we had a different media spin. We didn't need "star journalists" then, The story itself counted. But even then it was work. It is much harder to capture audience attention now, especially when the trend is against you! and ,thanks in the flow, I like you too!:)

[Patsy Stone]

11. It's verrrry James Bond...

I've never taken a word of it seriously. If it's true, I'll eat my damned Manolo's. You have to admit though, it's a good read. My own Ludlam novel in serial form.

[Dr.Phool]

12. I have some first hand experience

I live in Pasco County, Florida, and have been working on the Voting Machine Task Force for over a year, trying to get a paper trail. After taking our findings to Sen. Bob Grahams staff he introduced legislation that subsequently died.

On Nov. 3rd, a woman who worked on my campaign (I was a congressional candidate earlier this year.) was a pollworker on Nov. 2nd and previous years. She asked about an added procedure in this years tally. After the polls closed, they conducted an audit on the machines. This was unusual as they had never done it previously. I checked into it with our local computer expert, Patrick Bergy and was told by him that that wes the necessary first step to change the totals.

Of course the SOE denies this happened, but the woman is willing to sign an affadavit and has the other poll-workers as witnesses.

[jsamuel]

15. Send that to Keith!!!

[Razorback_Democrat]

16. She needs to be pointed to Conyers committee if this is real!

John Conyers is having hearing this week on vote irregularities and possible fraud.

Affidavits and testimony will be needed to bring anything real out of this other than just getting it on the congressional record.

[rdmccur]

37. Send it to Madsen, Conyers, BBV, and Palast for starters,

I wonder if Keith will do anything with it. My view is the MSM is cowed by the Bush administration

[flyarm]

64. dr phool..i was a poll watcher in pinellas

was a pollwatcher in pinellas...and i watched every step of post election, and where i was there was no ..no audit... the poll workers pulled the tapes out and i checked the numbers..and they signed each tape..

i smell stinky fish if your poll workers were doing an audit...did you have sequoia??
wow you need to call the dnc on that and send conyers a report on that immediately!!!

i did alot with pasco people during campaign..fine folks you have up there!!

pinellas delegate...fly

[aquart]

69. Willing is one thing. Signing another.

Let's see the signed, witnessed affadavit. I'm not doubting you or your witness, I'm just worried about slips between cup and lip. I don't know what we gain by waiting to get these documents.

[dweller]

13. who the hell is Marsden?

:shrug:


i've been to the Venuslounge before...

dp

[New Earth]

14. it's Madsen, Wayne Madsen

[NJCher]

17. good grief

Can't even get the name right and expresses doubt about the writer's story?

If a reader can't get the name of the writer correct, what makes anyone think this person even understood the story?

I'm a professor of writing and I had to read it at least three times to comprehend the details.

Some people should go back to reading comprehension and spelling lessons.


Cher

[dweller]

20. then who the hell

is Masden???


:eyes:


dp

[saracat]

21. That is just nasty . I had a couple of typos and I didn't proof read.

BFD. No one is paying me to write for this board. I was in a hurry and my reading comprehension skills are more than adequate. I am a published author ( not that that is indicative of anything these days! LOL) and need no advice from you. And BTW, I don't type either, so it is amazing that I post what I do. I think you must be a bit defensive because instead of attacking my premise, that Madsen is a phony, you critique my spelling instead. You must have drunk the kool aid.
I stand by my original suggestion that we find someone of the caliber of Sy Hersh to research this. The loonies cost us credibility. Allegations without proof denigrate our issue.

[Stand and Fight]

31. Saracat...

You're not the only one a little turned off by the recent stories and those who are telling them. I'm just laying low and watching everything develop, but you're not the only one on here with reservations. Nonetheless, you really should remember how to spell the subject matter's name. Just lends more weight to your argument, and it shows that you at least read the "story".

[saracat]

38. I apologize for misspelling his name,nothing else. I read the story,

Why else would I be concerned with his credibility? Sheesh. The asylum is being taken over by the inmates. (I am not referring to you, Stand and Fight!)

[NJCher]

42. this is the "underground"

Thank you. You just backed up my original post. You have no grounds on which to call WM a looney. And as far as Kool-Aid goes, it seems you're the one asking for Skippy brand peanut butter to deliver up the story on the front page of the Washington Post or the New York Times.

Brand names make you comfy? Afraid of your own ability to evaluate a story?

I thought so.


Cher

[saracat]

49. Wow! Are you testy! I do not doubt my ability to evaluate a story.

If you were able to comprehend the meaning of my post, you would understand that the meaning alluded to is the impression conveyed to the general public. When the only champions of the cause that can be produced are specious at best, the general public, lead by MSM, will dismiss all fraud allegations as part of lala land.
It is like the saying."If it is not on TV it didn't happen" We need to control what appears on TV and select an unassailable spokesperson. We must have the ability to defend ourselves under attack. We currently are without anyone credible to defend our argument. That is why I recommended the names I did. There are others as well. What about RFK Jr.?
But , I suppose it is hopeless explaining this to you.Apparently you have no ability to understand public relations or the manipulation of public perception. Sigh.

[Name removed]

63. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saracat]

65. Good. And they won't care about you and neither will I.

And don't you ever "Hey, sugar, me". Obviously civility is NOT your strong suit.

[Sideways]

66. No My Strong Suit Is My Armani

But Max Mara and Prada work in a pinch.

[saracat]

67. Boring. I prefer Lagerfeld and Byblos . But as you won't be

working with the MSM anytime soon, it doesn't matter. :D

[Sideways]

70. Byblos is Tight

Lagerfeld has that KKKarl thing going on so I had to give him up. :evilgrin:

[Stand and Fight]

28. Right on, NJCher.

Makes me seriously question their intentions when they miss small details like that. I mean, come on? MARSDEN! Give me a freaking break!

[Stand and Fight]

26. LOL

Faye, he was joking... Sheesh.
:eyes:

[tandem5]

19. Can't find "real" evidence unless we look...

and that search is going to be fraught with dead ends and false leads. We need to be critical, ask questions, but ultimately, at this point, we need to just go with the flow.

I think there is a distinction between beneficial skepticism and undercutting a person's effort (genuine or not) to find the truth.

[brindis_desala]

22. You are correct but the risk is deeper than that...

Let us assume for argument's sake that Madsen's story is on the level
(a stretch). Now imagine that Bush and the Saudis were implicated how exactly would you prove it without the testimony of the small fry responsible for the tampering. Is that likely to happen now that Madsen has warned whomever that person may be that he's going up against not some two-bit election official but the POTUS, (who btw controls half the Congress, the FBI and the CIA?

[carolinalady]

24. Even KO says parts of the story may be true

I think it is worth the time to prove or disprove==this will not tarnish our rep. either way it will show that DUers seek the truth good or bad.

[Stand and Fight]

32. I second that

I second that most sensible and level headed argument.

[carolinalady]

36. Wow ! Thanks . This blonde NEVER gets accused of being

sensible. LOL. Good night all.

[robbedvoter]

27. Feeling quasy as well - because of his history, style. Still, it seems

that some parts of the story may yet get confirmed - so, I am waiting to see.

[KnowerOfLogic]

29. "Real" means governmental, official; we have no one in any public

position with any legal authority who will do anything about this. That is the problem. We can talk and speculate all we want, and we may even be right, but until we can get some legal authority behind us, it won't amount to a hill of beans.

[mostly_lurking]

33. I am with you

I am getting very discouraged at the gullibility of so many here concerning Madsen and Curtis. I feel "slimy" just reading their stuff and I fear it discredits the entire effort.

[shraby]

40. If someone (Curtis) signs an affidavit accusing

someone of a crime, I would think he can back it up because the penalties for committing perjury and libel are not user friendly.

edited for tpyo

[saracat]

41. Umm , yeah well. Those are the least enforced laws in the nation.

That is why it was so ridiculous that they tried it with Clinton.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saracat]

50. You know what they say about assumptions.

I also am familiar with the law. I am nor interested in speculation. Time is of the essence and we need substantiated proof now.
I understand that a vote rigging scheme might not be simple.But it also might not be as complicated as some think. That is why it is plausible. No one would like to see this election overturned more than me. I have been crucified verbally for defending the concept of a stolen election. But I will not defend that which does not offer concrete evidential support or smacks of self promotion. The fact that many people are working on exposing this issue does not mean that all of them are valuable.

[MarkusQ]

51. That's silly

You seem too smart to be so naive -- a vote-rigging scheme could not be simple, isolated, single-source or done without lots of international money laundering -- so I have to think you really are trying to thwart the effort for the real voice of the people to run our government, as the founding fathers intended when they wrote the Constitution.

It could (and IMHO has) been done in a simple way without any international money laundering--simply identify the precincts that are most likely to vote for your opponent and make sure they don't get enough voting machines. Since it takes a finite amount of time to vote, and the polls are only open for a finite amount of time, you can effectively cap how many votes your opponent gets.

No Black Helicopters required.

As for doing it in a isolated, single-source way, how about having electronic touch screen machines that preferentially register votes for the candidate of your choice--say by making the active area for the one you want to win 50% larger than the active area for the one you want to lose, or by shifting them around slightly?

No Super-Secret activation codes needed.

And as a final note, I seriously doubt our founding fathers intended our country to be run by internet rumours and wild accusations. As always, I am willing to be convinced otherwise but (again as always) I would like something more than just another wild claim to back it up, even if it comes in the form of an affidavit. Instead, I would prefer externally verifiable fact. Could you, perchance, point me to the section of the constitution (or any contemporary documentation) that you believe supports your position?

--MarkusQ

[aquart]

71. Critcism is absolutely necessary.

And the writers you mention actually rely on us to catch questions and flaws, weaknesses in the evidence and argument.

If a thesis can't withstand DU, how's it gonna survive in the big, wide world?

[wiggs]

52. You know what? Beggars can't be choosers.

Bernstein and Hersh aren't there for us.

Most of our democratic leaders aren't there for us.

The main stream media certainly aren't there for us.

The FBI and Judiciary Committee aren't there for us.

I would like to think that Kerry's got our backs, but I'm not sure.

So, we get Jesse Jackson, Ralph Nader, Cobb, and Badnarik. We get zealous, flawed, determined, ambitious gadflies like Madsen, Curtis, and Bev poking their noses into this smelly election, stirring up trouble, making some enemies, and giving skeptics plenty to talk about.

What the hell else do we have? And maybe these are just the kind of people that will dive into dumpsters, wrestle with election officers over trash bags, beg for internet donations, and goad people into answering questions! Maybe they'll shake something loose...stumble onto signed poll tapes in the trash...annoy an official into saying something they shouldn't. Maybe messy journalism is just what is needed because, I'll tell you, real journalism is a hair's width away from being dead in MSM.

Maybe Bev is trying to make a buck. I gave money after she promised breaking news within a day or two. The news didn't come and I was a little bitter about it, but I think it is better that she is out there. Seems like she could be doing it differently to me but, again, she's out there and I'm not.

These rogue investigators are not perfect and we hope they don't drive the car into the ditch, but right now they are the only ones with the keys.

I believe that the FBI and ACLU should be all over this in every dark corner of Florida, Ohio, New Mexico, Nevada, California, and New York. But as far as I can see, they aren't.

[saracat]

54. Hersh is there for us. Who do you think broke Abu Garib?

RFK Jr. is here for us . Read what he has to say about this election and listen to him on AAR. As for Bernstein, no one has asked, but he was on our side during the election. He went after Woodward. As for our leaders, I agree with you. They have their feet in both camps. They mostly represent themselves. We have ripped apart some of the MSM who have tried to help us but we still have a few. Olberman and Bill Moyers for example. But we need more. And we need someone on our side who is indisputable. A Pulitzer Prize winner ia always good, which is why I mentioned who I did as suggestions.
The rouge investigators may have their place, but it is only to get the ball rolling. We cannot have them as our spokes person without undermining our efforts. Ms Harris is the perfect example of that. We cannot withstand more of that bad publicity. We don't need to look delusional.

[wiggs]

57. RFK, Moyers.

Love Moyers. No one watches PBS.

I'm reading RFK's book now...excellent and depressing. Bush's obscene record on the environment ALONE should have been enough for Kerry to win the election. How many of these environmental scandals were reported in MSM with regularity? How many MSM talk shows has he been on, making the book circuit?

Look...we had Paul O'Neill, an ENTIRELY CREDIBLE insider come out and basically say that Bush's administration is disfunctional. His day in the sun lasted about 5 minutes.

Richard Clarke said that Bush's administration did nothing to prevent 9/11...an assertion backed up (but buried) in the 9/11 commission report. He was framed as a disgruntled employee and forgotten.

Abu Ghraib was more horrible than we know. Congress and the administration saw more images than we. Hersh had a lot of information. But I remember Hersh making the rounds when his book came out. He soft-peddled criticism of the WH and spent almost as much time criticizing Kerry. I don't know what happened to him.

Where are all the reporters describing what is really happening in Iraq, how bad it really is? They are writing for publications in other countries, actually.

Remember the Pentagon whistleblower Kwiatkowski who had detailed information about pre-Iraq manuevering at the Pentagon? How many interviews on MSM did she get?

Who is following up with Plame? Edmons? Abu Ghraib. Medicare? Chalabi/Iran? Energy Task Force? Gonzales torture memo?

This administration has the media locked down and I don't know how it turns around.

We are quite alone.

[saracat]

58. I agree with you on much of what you say. But we must get a credible

spokes persom who will garner MSM attention. We cannot remain alone. We must use what credible resources we have. Jesse Jackson has already made a difference, but we need more. Where is Gore BTW? He was teaching journalism for god's sake. Well Al, here is a story. They might shred Al for covering this story but it would get attention. Ron Reagan is another one who could get the attention but they seem to be burying him. JMHO. Thinking on board.

[saracat]

55. And for the record Arnebeck is credible too!

[George W. Hayduke]

62. CLINT CURTIS'S DOG FOUND DEAD!

posted by bradblog at:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/

[Hamoth]

68. Curtis' Book makes him dosdgy IMHO -N/T

[jsamuel]

72. You sure are putting that sentament in every thread about this, aren't you

hmmm...

Don't believe people who write books... riiight.

[jamboi]

73. doggy? Yeah, I think that if your life is threated you shouldn't write a

book about it. And if you see your friends killed, whatever you do don't call the MSM about it. And if two of your dogs are killed, whatever you do don't give sworn testimony evidence about it. because then you'll be dosdy. IMHO.

[MarkusQ]

74. kick

[Kralizec]

76. I agree it is frustrating. But things don't come easy when there is a

cover-up. It's not going to be given on a plate to us. And of course if we are hot on the trail they are going to try to say that we have nothing but ideas and theories. People have been convicted of murder with enough circumstantial evidence. We have tons.