Talk:Richard Armitage (government official)/Archives/2016
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Assessment comment
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Richard Armitage (government official)/Archives/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
| Comment(s) | Press [show] to view → |
|---|---|
| The Richard Armitage bio was pretty informative, but, I was surprised the information from William Stevensons article "Bank of Intrigue" was not listed. This guy was in the news quite a bit in the 70's and 80's and mentioned by "Bo Gritz;" ""General Khun Sa" from Berma; The Nugan Hand Bank incident;" as well as publications; "The politics of Herion in South East Asia" being one.I knew this guy's name brought up something from the past, and I'm more than a little surprised no one is talking about "it" anymore (especially with all the herion flowing out of Afganistan these days.) I was warned away from these issues many years ago from a very credible source from the CIA's past, and dropped my research, but I would love to see some soul (braver than I) bring the issues back into the light.
An old soldier . . . == First paragraph worded as a "put-down". Sounds rhetorical, biased. == The second line: "He was found to be too slow for varsity play and instead began a lifelong obsession with lifting weights." Could be worded so as not to imply that Armitage was mentally slow. Further, the subjective term "obsession" is needlessly employed. This sort of partisan slant is one of the reasons Wiki has become broadly rejected as an acceptable source by academe. 71.198.218.1 19:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Steve B. Santa Cruz, CA | |
Last edited at 19:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 03:17, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Controversy
There's also a lot of controversy around this guy, maybe someone can add a section on that eventually. Themindset 17:50, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
This guy is a dirtbag. He is running around allowing the media to portray him as a former Navy SEAL. He was never a Navy SEAL. As a graduate of the Naval Academy, he has violated our sacred honor code by allowing a false sense of his military record to be circulated among the public. Scumbags like this guy get great jobs and benefits they do not deserve, depriving others of a job that they would be entitled to.
Well scumbag he may be but there are some indications his diplomatic talents prevented a nuclear exchange between Pakistan and India.... http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000293.php If it's true...
I love him.
he did not stop a nuclear war! thats a lie. the washington post is not always truthful. i hate him and so does every Pakistani.
I think that as an undeniable CONTROVERSIAL public figure this man deserves to have a Controversy section on his page (especially given his widely publicized role in the Plame affair which is mentioned on the page but not focused on.) I would have to say that it seems like a pretty glowing article for a man about whom public opinion is divided. 50.170.76.168 (talk) 04:36, 25 March 2016 (UTC)masonpew
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Richard Armitage (politician). 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071019042601/http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engASA110161999 to http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engASA110161999
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
- 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) 21:54, 20 July 2016 (UTC)