Reply #89: Amen [View All]

[Paligal]

We people who are working hard at actually gaining some credibility and doing something constructive get called freepers for discouraging the dissemination of a completely unsupported theory? NOTE: None of us who pleaded caution told you not to dig further into this theory and gather evidence. In fact, we encouraged it. We merely stated that it should not be sent to those who already doubt us, because it will add fuel to their flames. So perhaps you should reconsidered who is a "freeper" here.
Further, I read comments here that Madsen has technical facts and figures, and therefore, it must be true. Citing a cancelled check to an INVESTMENT FIRM, which gets plenty of big checks, is not corroborating evidence. Stating facts or figures that cannot be verified does not prove anything. And Madsen omits the facts and figures which COULD be verified, such as which and how many of "various" election precincts on lockdown there were. So how can you say that the story must be accurate due to facts and figures. That's like me saying "An informed source told me that the election was rigged in a certain precinct by a certain number of votes for a certain candidate. The source revealed that the numerous perpetrators were driving numerous Vespas and drove 45 miles per hour. They were paid $70,000 (see cancelled check to "Smith Contractors"). There are some facts and figures in there, but they prove NOTHING. Wouldn't you require a little more information before submitting that to the press? If not, you are either lazy or foolish. If you think this is a good lead, PLEASE, help us out. Do the groundwork and investigate it. Get some useable facts and figures to back up the story.
Until then, lay off the "freeper" attacks on those with some common sense to exercise caution and not trust everyone with a theory who comes on here and throws a story with holes at us. We are seeking the TRUTH. So let's get it. Raise the bar.