Jump to content

Talk:Franklin C. Spinney

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

I think that Spinney, tough not quite with the same impact as Eisenhower at the end of his presidency, shed a good light on the single most important threat to world peace there ever was (and the reason why we have never achieved it and are in a uphill battle to do so). Of course it is deplorable that he only gets to be heard in obscure media channels (though Counterpunch rocks!), since the dangers of financing the biggest standing army history has ever known concerns every american (I am Canadian but still I am preoccupied by it and the beligerant stance our own leader is recently taking). The war on warmongering is on, and it is our responsibility to see to it that they lose. The documnentary "Why we fight" has inspired me to pitch my shoulder to the wheel, and I began with the article on Spinney.

I believe that more people need to know anout him and that information on him be available for people who, like me, have just watched the movie and are looking for his bio on the BEST THING TO HAPPEN TO INFORMATION SINCE THE DIDEROT ENCYCLOPEDIA, than is, Wikipedia.

On the issue of the Pentagon, the book by Jeffrey St-Clair, Grand Theft Pentagon, is very enlightning, though it is badly edited and full of really bad mistakes: if the left is going to seriously attack the hawks of this administration, it better start getting it's editing right!

Astragale 11:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever one's stance here, the above clearly shows the tone of the articl--and the editor--to be POV and propagandistic. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and only an encyclopedia, and efforts to crusade using it should be rebuked and enforced. Spinney is an important historical figure of the late 20th century, but treatment of his life and views needs to be done from a neutral point of view.--Buckboard 19:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Buckboard (talkcontribs)

Duplicate article

[edit]

There was a duplicate of this article at Frank Spinney, which I've redirected to this page. I would have merged the histories, but there is too much overlap, so there's still a non-trivial edit history at Frank Spinney, which would only become an issue if there's a reason to move this page there at some future time. Then a history swap would probably be appropriate, which would require administrative assistance. -GTBacchus(talk) 07:00, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Franklin C. Spinney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:14, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]