Wayne Madsen? Whats the deal?

[iconoclastNYC]

Does anyone have a dossier on Madsen? Meaning...is there a list of things he's done to loose his credibility. Because Malloy talked about an article that he recently posted where the "read between the lines" is that there might be people planning a military coup against W.

Malloy went out of his way to note Madsen's questionable credibility so i'm curious.

[punpirate]

1. Here's an attempt to explain, starting with...

... Madsen's reportorial style. Madsen takes facts presented by other news sources and then weaves those in with his own interpretation of sometimes other ambiguous stories. Those factual and ambiguous stories may not even have much to do with primary theme, but they are used by Madsen to borrow credibility.

Many people then say, well, what Madsen said turned out to be true. Some of the ambiguous stories become less ambiguous over time, leading to that belief. But the primary interpretations made by Madsen himself are often wild and are never followed up by Madsen with future factual reporting or corrections when time and events have shown him to be wrong.

Madsen isn't a reporter operating by accepted journalistic rules. He's not trained as a journalist, and doesn't write like one. If he has anonymous sources inside the government, as he often claims, it's quite possible that they're misleading him to make the internet-based blog world look stupid.

There are kernels of truth in most everything he writes, but they come from mainstream reporting of others (which he often does not properly attribute). His surmises about those are too often wrong, especially at those times when the events he predicts are tied to some deadline--our elections, etc. The deadline passes and what he predicts doesn't happen. Because of his failures to attribute properly, people gain the belief that his reporting is both original and prescient. They tend to ignore the fact that, in retrospect, his conclusions are not sound, and events did not turn out the way he said they would.

This is in marked contrast to other, more experienced, reporters who also use anonymous sources. Seymour Hersh, for example, writes a story about an Abu Ghraib report, and a month later, bang!, Taguba's report is mainstream. When he says, there are videos, and they're worse than anything you've seen yet, and that he's seen bits of them, bang!, next thing you know, the ACLU is suing the Pentagon for FOIA release of videos of torture which the government is determined to avoid releasing.

If Madsen had the same track record on scoops that Hersh has, he'd have the same reputation. But, he doesn't. Most of what he reports which can be determined to be original to him doesn't pan out.

Cheers.

[rinsd]

17. This is the most even handed explanation I've ever seen on Madsen.....

...excellent post!

[LittleClarkie]

2. Well, his website has a report about McCain and some folks

meeting today, but I didn't read it.

There's a DailyKos diary up right now that talks about it, complete with links to his site.

I dunno. I get the feeling he "connects the dots" with too much spit and bale wire.

When he was criticized by DailyKos, he decided they were part of the enemy, and questioned their liberal credibility. I get the impression he's got quite the ego.

There was also a matter of proof he said he had re: the stolen election that he wasn't able to cough up, but still insisted that since he couldn't cough it up, that in and of itself meant the election was stolen.

If you go to his site, it's alittle strange. I can't explain why, but it strikes me funny.

[greyl]

3. He said the DU is run by neocons on his homepage.

It may still be there.

[LittleClarkie]

4. Said something similar about Kos

I think it had to do with Katrina and somehow our sites blocking the story he was trying to report from getting out. Something about blocked radio frequencies or something. Wish I could rememeber.

I'm afraid he strikes me as being somewhat cuckoo for cocoa puffs.

[Behind the Aegis]

5. This Wayne Madsen?

"This space formerly linked to Democratic Underground is now linked to Progressive Independent (For those who are tired of the PC types at Daily Kos and DU) - Democratic Underground is frequented and moderated by people who constantly trash the Dalai Lama, Hugo Chavez, George Galloway, Jacques Chirac, and Fidel Castro -- I call people like those neo-cons. You can always identify them by their tiresome talking points and their rank odor)." look in the left hand scroll bar of favorite sites

[JNelson6563]

8. Certain criteria to pos there though

If you aren't brimming with hatred for any and all Dems you won't fit at PI.

Julie

[Behind the Aegis]

9. Yes...I know.

I wouldn't be allowed there. Not because I don't think that I am brimming with hate for any and all Dems, but because I don't think that....well, you can look at my avatar, I am sure I wouldn't be welcomed unless I hated myself, which I don't. (Surely this will get me posted there!)

On edit: this is not an attack on you, Julie. You are pretty open-minded as I recall. But, the "others" will "love" my post.

[AntiFascist]

10. How do you feel about Hillary?

:popcorn:

[Behind the Aegis]

11. well...

...I have not been pleased with some of her comments. However, I know what the US system is like and opposing her could lose us a seat in the Senate. Until we can have a multiple party system, fights against our own seems counterproductive.

[greyl]

13. You also can't win an argument with the owner of that site

without the entire argument being deleted to destroy the evidence. That place is a low-quality den of extreme hypocrisy and shabby thinking.

edit: It's telling that they ignorantly wear Madsen's approval as a badge of credibility when they had to uncritically kiss his ass to get it.

[seemslikeadream]

16. That is absolutely untrue

[meganmonkey]

18. I second that

:shrug:

[seemslikeadream]

19. I've decided to not to get involved in this

on edit

[meganmonkey]

20. probably a good idea

:yoiks:

[G_j]

21. I hear ya

sure there are some strong feelings, big deal.

I would hope that folks don't magnify this into some kind of 'war'.
Both sites have members working for the betterment of the world.
Some of us visit and post at a number of places.

[AntiFascist]

25. I agree...

and I don't have hatred for Dems, in fact I would support most of the DLC candidates except for Hillary. Bill Clinton was a great president domestically, but when it comes to foreign policy there is no real distinction between either of the Clintons or the Bushes. Hillary has not demonstrated that she can distinguish herself significantly, but only compromises so that she can appeal to the right wing as well as the left. The impression I get is that Clintons may be participating in the oil-based culture of corporation (and I'm not talking about the Lewinsky scandal) as much as any other fat cat politician, except for Kerry who theoretically should have enough of his own money that he is somewhat immune.

As far as Madsen is concerned, he seems to be a strong supporter of Bill Clinton. He had some choice words to say to me in a Yahoo group once when I suggested that FBI whistleblowers who claim to have tied the Clintons in with the Bush Family Evil Empire be investigated further.

[JNelson6563]

23. That was my experience, also

promoting action over playing keyboard commando will draw mighty fire. Another experience. :toast:

[Capn Sunshine]

26. At least you can mention their site

I'm just sayin....:hide:

[AntiFascist]

6. Here's an example....

of a Madsen report where all he did was post an Open Letter to Patrick Fitzgerald, without any of his own commentary:

http://antifascist2005.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/6/61854/9150

(I can't link directly to his report because of the nature of his website.)

He was the only one reporting this open letter so I assume it must have been handed directly to him.

He also wrote one of the Introductions to the book: "Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy and the Failed Hunt for Bin Ladin" available on Amazon.

From this Introduction:

"The world of intelligence where the truth is not always the truth and lies are not always lies has been characterized by some observers as a "hall of mirrors."

Last year Madsen's reputation came into question when he claimed he had proof of a $29 million check underwriting vote fraud:

http://reverereport.blogspot.com/2004/11/wayne-madsen-qa.html

but the check turned out to be fake. I was probably among his biggest fans on DU at the time, so I suppose I'm also "guilty" of promoting this story.

My feeling now is that there is an accumulating pile of evidence suggesting Saudi influence in Washington D.C. which is being kept from the American public, but which people like Madsen are pushing the envelope on. You can see a comprehensive report at:

http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/conspiracytheories/

Don't let the intro and the "conspiracy theory" label keep you from reading the whole thing, it contains a lot of interesting facts. You can also download the 600 MB bittorrent of the tv documentary using the tracker provided by the CBC website.

[AntiFascist]

7. oops, I guess I forgot about this.....

apparently he also got dissed by Keith Olbermann's blog:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x123770

[Adelante]

12. Because he is extremely careless

He does not bother to find out if something is true or not before publishing it. Then a whole bunch of "news" sites who don't care if something is true or not, either, pick up his stories and republish them all over the web. If I remember correctly, DUers did a research project a while ago that showed his unreliability as a source. If you did a search, you could probably find it. I never saw it, but it's been referred to in other threads about him. I've seen mods post in threads that he is not considered an acceptable source by DU and possibly that's why he switched the link on his site from DU to another site started by DUers and former DUers who may be more accepting of this level of journalistic integrity.

[Cocoa]

14. I think he's very careful

I see Madsen's writings as intricately crafted disinformation.

[Adelante]

15. "Intricately crafted disinformation" yes

When Hurricane Katrina hit, James Lee Witt went to Louisiana to assist Governor Blanco at her request. He did this pro bono, but that didn't stop Madsen from saying she had "hired" Witt. Okay, so that could be a misunderstanding, if it stopped there, but it didn't. Madsen then claimed that Witt's firm was part of a project that had been granted a half million dollar contract to prepare for a catastrophic hurricane hit on New Orleans, but the money was diverted to Iraq by Republicans who were "partners in crime" with Democrats James Lee Witt and his partner Wesley Clark. This was absolutely false and all Madsen would have to have done was ask James Lee Witt Associates to confirm the information, but he never bothered. Now once he was called on it, he posted a retraction on his own website, but the "news" sites who republish his nonsense are under no obligation to carry the retraction and don't to this day.

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. He reported on the 'imminent' US attack on Iran

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2399

[yodermon]

24. Disinfo agent.

His writings muddy the waters between truth & rank speculation, and he poisons the well every time he's quoted by the left. He is most certainly aware of this.