Talk:William Kreutzer Jr.

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

Untitled[edit]

This is very biased and portrays Kreutzer as a victim of his chain of command and the US Army. The facts are that he killed people for no good reason (i.e., self defense or combat). Every point made in this article justifies Kreutzer's actions because he didn't get help or people didn't listen to him.

"...the only caucasian..." on death row is mentioned. Why? Although factual (maybe?), it is a fact that is irrevalent to this article and reeks of a racial agenda.

What about the Special Forces soldiers who stopped him from killing more people. They're not mentioned by name, yet others are mentioned specifically in an attempt to further victimize Kreutzer.

Do some more research and put more facts in there to balance the article.

I've changed the opening sentence to illustrate how this should be worded.

EETech 13:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and disagree, "gained notoriety" was poor word choice on my part. But I think "joined the army and committed murder" is also a poor word choice on your part. I'd suggest we nix both terms, and leave it as "and three years later, opened fire". I'm not sure what the "racial agenda" is, whether you're accusing me of being biased against whites or blacks, but I know that among Western countries it's largely considered a "controversy" that the US is far more likely to put blacks on death row, than whites - so when a person is the only white example on death row, then I feel that merits mention. If you can think of a better way to word it of course, feel free, I just feel the information is valuable. Could you give examples of exact quotes from the article that you feel "portray Kreutzer as a victim of his chain of command and the US Army". The only wording that even mildly suggests that, is when we directly quote him, which is something we have to do. Similarly, the Adolf Hitler article lists why Hitler said he was going to do what he did. It's not a fact that Kreutzer did it to "send a message" or that it was actually "God's way", but it is a fact that Kreutzer claimed that, which is important. Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 19:02, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]


My replies in << >>.
I think "joined the army and committed murder" is also a poor word choice on your part. <<Agreed -- it was intentional just to get a balance between the two.>>
I know that among Western countries it's largely considered a "controversy" that the US is far more likely to put blacks on death row, than whites - so when a person is the only white example on death row, then I feel that merits mention. <<Exactly my point. Maybe it does merit attention, but I don't think it's relavent here. Kreutzer was a killer, whether black or white. The others on death row? Who knows, but they have nothing to do with Kreutzer.
EETech 02:48, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good compromise on that opening paragraph. The writer's (albeit justifiable) personal hatred toward the subject was a bit to overt in the old version. Rearden Metal 16:06, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what of malone and bridges?[edit]

Victims

* Major Stephen Mark Badger, killed * Major Lofaro, was in a coma for 45 days * CWO Abraham Castillo, helicopter pilot paralyzed from waist down * SPC Molon

* SPC Bridges

so, what happened to malone and bridges? more info would be good.

Guantanomo[edit]

What relevance does the Guantanomo connection have with this article? I could almost understand if the individuals mentioned had been involved in a similiar incident, however thats not the case here. It would be appropriate to perhaps include that on the individual articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.55.215.39 (talk) 03:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I agree what is the relevance of this section. I would say delete it Paragoalie (talk) 03:23, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

photo[edit]

I found a better photo and put an upload request at IFU. It's been there for several days, so maybe someone from here could process it. 69.228.171.150 (talk) 23:18, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ACU's[edit]

Why is he in ACU's? It says his last year of service was 1995, long before ACU's were introduced to the Army, but in the photo of him he is wearing them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.203.25.146 (talk) 09:12, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While assigned to the USDB inmates are still on active duty, hense the uniform.Paragoalie (talk) 03:21, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Links to Akbar case[edit]

There are a couple of references to this case in a recent opinion about the Akbar case (United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces opinion):

  • One of the attorneys took a course "so that he could handle the capital case of United States v. Kreutzer"
  • A citation of Kreutzer on page 36

Not sure which of those links (or others) merit mention in the article, but at least the similarities between the cases seem to be reasonable to refer to somehow. DavidLeeLambert (talk) 16:16, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on William Kreutzer, Jr.. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:06, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on William Kreutzer Jr.. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 01:57, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:William_Kreutzer_Jr.&oldid=1208041106"