***DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND OUTED AS A RIGHT-WING FRONT***

[MacCruiskeen]

The evidence is on Page 4 of this RI thread:

http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board/v ... 0&start=45

This is it in a nutshell:

A long-time regular poster to Democratic Underground and its "9/11" subforum has just been outed as a self-described "right-wing reactionary". His DU user-name is "Sweet Pea". He is the author of a blog that argues that the Democratic Party should never be allowed to run the country, and his sidebar includes a link to Little Green Footballs.

The DU Administrators have deleted all this evidence from their website, and Sweet Pea has been neither banned nor suspended from the site. On the contrary: he's still there, and still apparently welcome.

NOTE: I believe this is something more important than trivial infighting or Internet gossip. It's long been my strong suspicion that DU's founder, who chooses to call himself "Skinner", is running a Skinner Box, and that many of the "debunkers" at the 9/11 Dungeon are full-time paid operatives. (How else do they find the time, the energy and the desire to do what they do?) The place is incredibly popular, and therefore an enormous time-and-energy sink.

So this incident deserves a lot of publicity. I cannot think of any rational explanation for it except that DU is a deliberate right-wing front organisation designed to attract, monitor, channel and neutralise dissent on the Web.


A Skinner Box

[slomo]

A few years ago, when I was still naive, I found my way to DU. There was something that didn't feel right about the place. I remember early during the Plame affair there was a character who passed himself off as an insider, in-the-know, promising that justice was coming "very soon". He seemed a little too smooth, and a little too good at gathering a following. It left me with a vaguely uncomfortable feeling. Not from any conscious decision, I stopped reading DU.

Keep in mind, these were the days when I still believed in John Aravosis and Kos.

I hope this gets wider press.

[MacCruiskeen]

A few years ago, when I was still naive, I found my way to DU. There was something that didn't feel right about the place.

...

I hope this gets wider press.

Couldn't agree more, slomo.

Jack Riddler and SLAD are now having a lot of fun with this in a new thread at DU, entitled: "My God, who would publish such hateful rhetoric?"

The site's blog roll (on the right column) includes endorsing links to Instapundit, Little Green Footballs and the like, but you'll also find Democratic Underground listed. However, if you move your cursor over the DU link, the pop-up label announces, "The apex of the Lunatic Left."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... _id=212059

Worth reading in detail. I hope they'll keep it up as long as possible, before eventually revealing that the blog author is that favoured DU regular and 9/11 Bedunker, Sweet Pea.

And I wonder how DU and Skinner will eventually react.

[sunny]

Mac, you should copy that thread here before it goes "poof".

[seemslikeadream]

JackRiddler (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 08:56 AM
Original message
My God, who would publish such hateful rhetoric?
I found a really gross right-wing blog on the public domain known as the Internet today.

Thought I'd share it and invite your comments on what motivates this kind of irrational, hateful rhetoric. In place of actually engaging ideas he disagrees with, the writer has all the usual talk of "moonbats" and "Bush Derangement Syndrome."

The site's blog roll (on the right column) includes endorsing links to Instapundit, Little Green Footballs and the like, but you'll also find Democratic Underground listed. However, if you move your cursor over the DU link, the pop-up label announces, "The apex of the Lunatic Left." Such a wit!

The photo accompanying the following sample text comes with a particularly hateful and classless photoshop jab against a woman who happens to be toothless, which I will spare you. But you can follow the link and see the explicit call not to vote for the Democratic nominee for yourself. (In bold.) It just makes me so sad.

What motivates people to think and talk like this? Any ideas?

http://instapinch.com/?p=811




Thursday, December 13th, 2007

Air America


If anyone - anyone, anywhere- wants to find out why - for whatever reason - Democrats - or progressives or the left or whatever the hell they are calling themselves these days - should not and should never be allowed to be entrusted with the defense and the national security of this nation, just listen to Air America.

Air America is, of course, the left’s answer to the conservative talk-radio juggernaut that has been in existence the last 20 years or so. Problem is, their idiotic and absolutely moronic and stultifying programming and hosts can’t pick up and keep an audience anywhere....

(snip)


...I listen to hit one of their extended commercial breaks or when I need a good dose of idiocy.

As I said in the beginning, if you really *really* want to get an idea why these absolute idiots should never *ever* be trusted with the defense and national security of America and the free world, have a listen online or check out channel 167 on XM. Unlike those morons, I have no desire to shut them up. I’d love to have everyone in America listen to this crap.

Their content? Hate Bush Bush Bad Bush very bad Bad Bush Bush Tortures Bush Lies Bush hates the environment Bush hates babies Bush eats babies Bush kicks grandparents and old people to the curb Bush hates Muslims Bush hates everyone Bush likes war Bush has killed bajillions Bush Bad Bad badbadbad Bush mean Bad Bush!!!!!!!

(snip)

...without a doubt the most uninformed, misinformed bunch of moronic lunatics I have ever had the misfortune to come across in my life.

2 Comments

Filed under Moonbattery

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
1. I have never listened to AA
Prefer NPR, and sometimes O&A. I don't really find anything you quoted as being "hateful", can you point it out?

Eye-rollingly myopic yes, but "hateful"?


Those of you who are familiar with the Instapinch know I have an ongoing, running gun battle going on with some elements of the Moonbat Left, those lunatic moronic idiots who insist 9/11 was an “inside job” or that things like a military stand-down order was issued to keep the military from “doing its job” on that day.


I have to agree with the "moonbat" part of this, though think it should extend to the right as well as the left.

Hope2006 (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. So you agree
with the explicit call not to vote for the Democratic Nominee? Or, is this just another example of the blogger's "eye-rollingly myopic" ways?

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Latter.
Excellent deduction.

Hope2006 (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Your willingness to cut a hard-core right-winger
slack because you agree with that person on his 9/11 views is interesting.

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Yes well sometimes one has to do that in real life
I get the impression folks here live in some kind of "progressive bubble" that protects them from the real world.

I have many close friends who are registered rebublicants. It happens when one spends a large portion of their adult life in the military. I have learned to disagree with one's political opinions with out finding it "hateful".

To me hateful includes racism, fundamentalism, homophobia, misogynists. It does not by default include people who advocate voting republican.

I find the poster's claim that democrats are bad for national security as myopic and "eye-rollingly"
silly.

JackRiddler (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. As do we all... have right-wing friends and family and such...
Which is fine and dandy. However, then there are places like DU, intended for debate among Democrats and progressives without the usual name-calling harrassment by the right wing. The long-established policy and practice here (which I may or may not agree with in many cases) is to block posters from the right. That rule is especially intended if the right-winger doesn't announce themselves, but lets others form the impression they're a member who agrees with the site's goals (in the local nomenclature that's called a "troll").

Anyway, thanks for having this abstract discussion about a hypothetical case. Take care, now.

Hope2006 (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #10
19. You hit the nail on the head n/t

Hope2006 (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. Except that
if that blog influences anyone who might have otherwise voted for Obama, then, those statements become much, much more than "eye-rollingly myopic".

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #13
17. What do they become exactly? (n/t)

Hope2006 (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. Dangerous to our country. Period.
Unless you happen to think that a vote for McCain is a vote that has our country's best interests in mind.

Very, very surprised you felt the need to even ask this.

JackRiddler (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #7
25. There's also the matter...
that in the real world, no one prevents me from calling my right-wing uncle who hates hippies a right-winger to his face. I would hope the same is true here, in a hypothetical case.

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. Oh BS
I seriously doubt you have ever had one of those.

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. Yes it is good to know who's buttering their bread and on what side of the slice
Edited on Tue Jun-24-08 10:05 AM by seemslikeadream
I like to know the motives of folks I'm arguing with

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. I'm straight...sorry (n/t)

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. I was speaking of political preferences
Edited on Tue Jun-24-08 10:10 AM by seemslikeadream
just to be clear, seems I've got yours straight now also, no doubt

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. I doubt you could get a ruler straight. (n/t)

Hope2006 (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. Ah, there it is again.
Ridicule in all it's glory.

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. Well at least we KNOW the mind set now
and where it is coming from

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #23
27. Spare me
and read her petty denouncements.

If you agee with her feel free to out my political views...as they are clearly so obvious.

Hope2006 (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #27
30. Given your responses in this thread
I can see where her conclusions are coming from. She is not ridiculing you, but, is, instead, drawing conclusions based on your responses.

It would have been refreshing to have seen you post that "she is wrong", and, "here is why".

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. AND I am drawing conclusions based on her shallow,
self-serving and predicable analysis.

If you want refreshing, have some lemonade. I feel no need to explain my views in the face of a trite accusation.

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #20
28. Love those personal attacks
Edited on Tue Jun-24-08 10:21 AM by seemslikeadream
keep 'em coming, why do you guys think they bother me at all? I like the world to see how ya'll fight discuss

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:22 AM
Original message
Apparently you do
you use them enough.

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
34. Shall we go back and try and discuss the OP?
Instead of hijacking this thread? Now you wouldn't agree with anything on that blog would you?

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #34
38. JFC
Let see. post #8

YOU hijacked the thread.

YOU started with the personnal accusations.

27. Spare me
and read her petty denouncements.

If you agee with her feel free to out my political views...as they are clearly so obvious.

Hope2006 (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #27
30. Given your responses in this thread
I can see where her conclusions are coming from. She is not ridiculing you, but, is, instead, drawing conclusions based on your responses.

It would have been refreshing to have seen you post that "she is wrong", and, "here is why".

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. AND I am drawing conclusions based on her shallow,
self-serving and predicable analysis.

If you want refreshing, have some lemonade. I feel no need to explain my views in the face of a trite accusation.

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #20
28. Love those personal attacks
Edited on Tue Jun-24-08 10:21 AM by seemslikeadream
keep 'em coming, why do you guys think they bother me at all? I like the world to see how ya'll fight discuss

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:22 AM
Original message
Apparently you do
you use them enough.

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
34. Shall we go back and try and discuss the OP?
Instead of hijacking this thread? Now you wouldn't agree with anything on that blog would you?

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #34
38. JFC
Let see. post #8

YOU hijacked the thread.

YOU started with the personnal accusations.

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #38
42. I SEE NO PERSONAL ATTACK THERE

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 09:35 AM
Response to Original message
5. "The apex of the Lunatic Left." Such a wit!
Oh really


I did not notice that one, CodePink Monsters, indeed!

Hope2006 (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. I didn't either.
Certainly sounds like a slam at DU.

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. Liking it and knowing it
are sometimes interdependent.

SidDithers (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #12
22. If you've got an accusation, come out and say it...
oh, wait, you already did that and the posts were deleted.

'Course, you've had problems with the rules before, so I can understand how you'd be reluctant to be specific about your complaints.

And if (when?) you do get that particular poster banned, will you be starting another thread cheering his tombstone?

Sid

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #22
26. No that was your friend that did that
Edited on Tue Jun-24-08 10:17 AM by seemslikeadream
I just stumbled on to a very closely held secret here

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #26
29. Typical of one so ensconced in their paranoid internet world
I don't know ANYONE here. it would be like referring to your favorite TV personality as your "friend" because you agree with your POV.

Closely held secret? It was no surprise to me.

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. Keep those personal attacks coming

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #31
36. Hmmm
just who's attacking who here?

SidDithers (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #26
33. I don't have any "friends" here...
Edited on Tue Jun-24-08 10:27 AM by SidDithers
there are some people with whom I agree on some topics. And others with whom I agree on other topics.

I wouldn't be surprised if you and I agreed on far more issues than we'd disagree upon. But that doesn't mean I'd call you "friend".

Sid

Edit to add: And there are posters who's opinions I respect, and there are those who's opinions I don't.

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #33
35. And you cerainly wouldn't agree with that blogger would you?
Edited on Tue Jun-24-08 10:29 AM by seemslikeadream
I mean it is so hateful against us Dems

vincent_vega_lives (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. I agree
Your views on 9-11 are "moonbatty".

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #37
43. THAT WAS NOT THE QUESTION
Edited on Tue Jun-24-08 10:46 AM by seemslikeadream
Why don't you want to answer the question?

SidDithers (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #35
40. No, I don't agree with that bloggers conservative political views...
just as I don't agree with the posters at Free Republic, or LGF.

And I'm sure I'd post in opposition to those opinions if they were posted here at DU.

Sid

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #40
41. but they are not allowed to post here are they?

SidDithers (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #41
44. They're not allowed to post their conservative political opinions...
but what if they only post about cats in The Lounge, or R2KBA in the Gungeon (lots of Dems and Conservatives seem to share that opinion), or if they only corrected the misinformation put out by the truth industry in the 9/11 forum - hypothetically speaking, of course.

The rules seem to allow them here, as long as they're not disruptive, though it does warn that they probably would be happier some place else.

I guess the question is: Would a hypothetical republican poster, who isn't distruptive, doesn't post about his/her conservative opinions, and isn't using DU bandwidth to actively campaign against Dem politicians, be allowed to post at DU about other topics of interest? Again, hypothetically speaking.

That of course, is a far different situation from another hypothetical poster repeatedly linking to hate sites that happen to share her/his views about 9/11, and then having to stand in the corner for a week. Hypothetically speaking.

Sid

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #44
46. Hypothetically speaking your republican poster
Edited on Tue Jun-24-08 11:02 AM by seemslikeadream
HAS A HATE SITE, Hypothetically

SidDithers (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #46
47. Well, then you probably shouldn't link to his site...
you know, given your history.

Sid

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #47
49. funny that a poster here would have a hate site and still be allowed to post here hypo!

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #52
54. Yes some folks "hypo" of course are VERY SMART and very carefully would craft posts
so not to break rules and out themselves for WHO they really are, others may make stupid mistakes, something a fraud would never do, except by one of his associates making a stupid mistake, how awful that would be after 4 years of carefully flying under the radar and the an accomplice outs them, Hypothetically speaking

seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #44
48. A poster with over 30,000 posts in 6 years may make a mistake along the way

where as a poster with 1000 carefully crafted posts in 4 years would not

[MacCruiskeen]

Thanks, SLAD! I would have taken hours to do that.

It's just a pity that thread is not in General Discussion where it could be recommended. Any chance of shifting it there? It's not actually 9/11 related, after all.

[Jeff]

Has a Duer pm'd Skinner or a mod with this, asking for action, or at least clarification of DU's rules? Naturally they have the info, but they deserve to be put on the spot for a response.

[MacCruiskeen]

Has a Duer pm'd Skinner or a mod with this, asking for action, or at least clarification of DU's rules? Naturally they have the info, but they deserve to be put on the spot for a response.

I think they deserve to be made to wriggle and squirm for a good long while first.

Very recently, Skinner made a point of writing a lengthy screed, the gist of which was that he would not tolerate anyone arguing in favour of voting against any Democrat candidates. He also said explicitly that that would include anyone supporting Cindy Sheehan should she choose to run against Nancy Pelosi.

So this Sweet Pea character would appear to be a real test case.

if you move your cursor over the DU link, the pop-up label announces, "The apex of the Lunatic Left."

[MacCruiskeen]

This is all very entertaining. Boloboffin is going apeshit:

boloboffin (1000+ posts) Tue Jun-24-08 12:48 PM
Response to Original message

62. My God! Who would attack a rule-abiding poster here with such nauseating self-righteousness?

And cloying faux innocence?

Especially after waxing on about how targeting members of DU for their terrible beliefs was such an awful, awful, never-to-be-done thing?

Heavens! Nobody here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... _id=212140

[MacCruiskeen]

Maybe it's time for someone to put up a post entitled, quite simply:

DUer Sweet Pea says DU is "The apex of the Lunatic Left."

...and argues that the Dems should never be allowed to run the country.

(How long has he had that link up at his website?)

[MacCruiskeen]

Oh joy!

mhatrw: Cue the Cyndi Lauper. [Link to YouTube, "True Colors"]

boloboffin:
Who would take such a beautiful song and make it a tool of hate?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... _id=212059

And he's not joking.

It's now up to 80 posts, it's 2:15 pm East Coast time, and there's still not a Moderator in sight.

[nathan28]

...the Lunatic Left."

You know what the problem is? A lot of historical facts, like "the CIA ran drugs through Mena AK" or "Money to fund two 9/11 hijackers was funneled through less than five people from Bandar bin Sultan's wife's bank account at Riggs Bank" are "lunatic." The gate-keeping at DU strikes me more as an example of the success of Public Fantasyland and "truthiness" over reality than it does a deliberate machination. So a couple right-wingers have successfully passed themselves off as democrats. Wow. Big surprise. Or not.

I have to agree. It's one of the most self-policing bodies of all time, so much so it'll take on hostile forces to self-police. [url=http://www.exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=7394&IBLOCK_ID=35&phrase_id=7722&PAGE=1]"The Democrats always break your heart."
[/url]

[Et in Arcadia ego]

Has a Duer pm'd Skinner or a mod with this, asking for action, or at least clarification of DU's rules? Naturally they have the info, but they deserve to be put on the spot for a response.

Why bother?

Anyone with a brain knows at best Du is a combined energy sink/release valve, at worst, exactly like what appears here.

Half the members of this forum have been banned form the place.

The only reason I haven't been is because I simply refuse to post there.

Good for LBN, and that's it, man.

Fuck that place.

[Et in Arcadia ego]

No admin that goes by the name 'Skinner' gets my vote for anything but a quick flush.

And the fact that the name is used in such blatant context to the forum's focus gives it all away plain as day.

The best social experiments are the ones that run themselves with little to no intervention.

Skinner rarely shows his hand.

I'm not sure, but does that place even LIST the mod names?

All I've ever seen is 'mod', not a screen name with 'mod' over the top. All mods on DU are anonymous, and I've NEVER seen that done ANYWHERE else.

That kind of behind-the-curtain shit to me is just another dead-giveway.

Why hasn't someone like seemslikeadream ever been given mod stats there, ya know?

EVIL PLACE, GO BYE BYE.

[slow_dazzle]

The OP jogged my memory about a brouhaha at DU in 2006. I remember seeing this a couple of years back and I bookmarked it because of the Wayne Madsen comments:

Here is a posting from one of the most open-minded, unbiased and most respected political reporters, Wayne Madsen.

"November 13, 2006 -- The anonymous left gatekeepers at the dubious progressive web site Democratic Underground have been at it again. One of their moderators using the handle "pinto" -- a bean that is high on the flatulence scale and and is a fitting name for someone who lords over the intestinal gas that arises from DU -- suggested that this web site and its editor is unreliable and/or bigoted. Seems that they can't make up their minds on whether this site is unreliable or bigoted.

"As far as the unreliable charge, it is a fact that this web site is used by a number of main stream media organizations to obtain story ideas. Our items are usually lifted without credit given, but there are a few exceptions to that, including our scoops that have appeared most recently in the New York Post, Borgabladet (Finland), PAP Polish News Agency, NewswatchIndia, and VHeadline.org (Venezuela). In addition, our stories are frequently quoted on the popular Randi Rhodes Show, the Stephanie Miller Show, Air America's Ring of Fire with Mike Papantonio and Bobby Kennedy, Jr., and Pacifica's KPFK and WPFW. Our stories have been used as the basis for investigative pieces by RAI-TV Italy, SVT Europa TV (Sweden), Al Arabiya TV, and other news networks. If we are unreliable, they must also be unreliable.

"As far as the insinuation that this editor and this web site are bigoted, that is a very serious charge and is obviously meant to be malicious with the intent to cause harm. For a decade and a half, this editor has appeared on a number of civil and human rights panels in various fora, including one sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus that also featured Martin Luther King III and Dr. William Pepper (a close confidant of Dr. Martin Luther King). Further, this editor has been thrice invited to appear before the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, in a related matter before a special French government court as an expert witness, and before the House International Relations Committee's Subcommittee on International Operations on genocide in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In addition, the editor was a special interlocutor between lawyers representing the families of the 911 victims and the government of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in collecting relevant evidence (including classified information) against Saudi Arabian financing of terrorist groups.

"My challenge to DU is to cite one example where this editor and this web site have been bigoted as they claim. This editor's German translation of Jaded Tasks is now a best selling book in Germany, a country that takes charges of bigotry and/or racism very seriously. So, unless DU can provide examples, they should refrain from publishing charges that cannot be substantiated. However, it is unlikely they will do so. Their modus operandi is to purposely engage in unsubstantiated libel and gratuitous assertions lacking any basis in fact. They are certainly not alone in the left gate keeping business.

"This web site receives its support from voluntary contributors, none of whom are bigoted or have any racist agendas. Perhaps the same is not the case with DU, incorporated as a Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) and which makes no secret of its agenda on the Middle East. Although DU's stated policy is not to give this web site "extra publicity," it is fitting to give some "extra publicity" to them. DU's registered agent is Potomac Programs, Inc., 815 Connecticut Ave., N.W.,#620, Washington, DC 20006. Potomac Programs' registered agent is United States Corporation Co., 1090 Vermont Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20005. United States Corporations' registered agent is Prentice Hall Corp. System, Inc., 1090 Vermont Ave. N.W., Washington, DC 20005 (same address as United States Corporation). Prentice Hall is part of Pearson - Prentice Hall. Interlocking registered agents and Liechtenstein connections? Very interesting.

"Democratic Underground LLC lists its administrative contact and address as: David Allen, 1612 20th Street, NW, Suite 401, Washington, DC 20009 with a mailing address of P.O. Box 53350, Washington, DC 20009."
http://waynemadsenreport.com/

quoted on this site The post where the narrative from Wayne Madsen is quoted is interesting.