Talk:Business International Corporation

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

Business

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I added some chapter headings and fleshed out the story, mostly from memory (1984-2001). DOR (HK) (talk) 10:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are so many unsourced references in this article. I'll work on perhaps the most egregious paragraph (by coincidence added by DOR (HK) (see note above).

CIA

Incidentally the CIA issue has just been revived by William Blum: [1]. The reference he gives is Lobster (magazine), issue 14, November 1987. It may not be much - but it's more than this article has. Testbed (talk) 18:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The CIA connection to Business International is mentioned in this 1977 New York Times article (2nd column, 11th paragraph). 68.91.90.176 (talk) 02:20, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this useful reference. I have edited the article to take account of this. Testbed (talk) 13:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]