Talk:Project for the New American Century

message: There's no more original research in this heavily improved section,
so any discussion of the current edit should be under this section
and only refering to the current resources and the wording I've used now.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.26.189.18 (talk) 19:25, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the IP contributor from Vienna that the speculation on politically useful genetically targeted biological weapons was among the more egregious and provocative statements within this arrogant war mongering 'study.'  It bothered others, as the supplied references show, and should be pointed out as careless and dangerous conjecture on the future of warfare! The art of war indeed! I'm a Vietnam era vet who was advocating for cooperative space development when this paper was published and I showed it to many people as an example of the danger of the military industrial complex  influenced by individuals who argued for military solutions with no personal military experience! It is perhaps telling that the principal author of RAD now identifies as a woman-- a bit of overcompensating in the past? Bkobres (talk) 23:33, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

text: I have problems with a lot of the sources being used the proposed addition.  Mackay's book seems like crankery - I don't think it passes WP:RS or W:DUE to devote an entire section to it.  Coldtype don't look like they pas WP:RS, either.  The Sunday Herald source doesn't mention it the genotype-targeting quote at all.  And the other sources (eg. Scoop, which isn't a great source) only mention PNAC in passing - it's not clear what relevance this has to them beyond the fact that they mentioned it in a paper.  The implication you're trying to draw from this quote - that PNAC advocated using genetic warfare, rather than warning about it - is WP:EXCEPTIONAL and requires better sourcing than this. --Aquillion (talk) 18:31, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: No more original research

message: ==Biological warfare that can "target" specific genotypes==
On page 60 (72 in the PDF) R.A.D. includes this statement: „And advanced forms of biological warfare that can "target" specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.“
* *
*
*
One of the first journalists, Neil MacKay, to show PNAC's plans for the invasion of Iraq had been detailed before the September 11 attacks, mentions and analyzes this quote in his 2006 book War Against Truth.Neil MacKay, "Former Bush Aide: US Plotted Iraq Invasion Long Before 9/11", The Wisdom Fund, Scottish Sunday Herald January 11, 2004, accessed June 1, 2007. *
Thomas Hartmann shows that the implications of this quote are an analyzation of the potential political profit of this "politically useful tool" which is discussed in R.A.D., but nowhere are the effects on its' "targets" mentioned in PNAC's main strategic blueprint. *
* 2A02:8388:1845:7400:A4D6:2DD2:E150:F130 (talk) 09:53, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Gangster8192 02:04, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2019 

message: The consensus of Bkobres, me and factual reality is, that there's official evidence from PNAC's official main strategic blueprint and those who neglect it, have no arguments, other than their right-wing (Breitbart) opinions, while I present multiple award-winning journalists' sources (instead of "original research"), who explicitly cite thie quote in their reliable sources and discuss it in detail. It's a clear breach of Article III of the UN Biological Weapons Convention, too, if you understand the implications of this quote. If you obviously don't, please keep from censoring it in a fascistoid Stalinist manner, which tries to deny actual reality by keeping officially released sources from the public, to manifest their oppression more easily for(/with) the politically responsible forces' pawns behind it. 185.26.189.18 (talk) 16:20, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: At least one other editor disagrees, so I do not see clear consensus. —C.Fred (talk) 15:48, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consensus 

message: I want the officially published official quote from the official main strategic paper by PNAC, 
which is discussed by award-winning journalists in reliable sources to be included in the article,
which is yet to be included to fulfill Wikipedia guidelines of neutrality and diversity of viewpoints:
X=censorship of this official PNAC quote, 
Y=inclusion of this official PNAC quote
Please change the on-going censorship of this official PNAC quote:
 ==Biological warfare that can "target" specific genotypes==
On page 60 (72 in the PDF) R.A.D. includes this statement: „And advanced forms of biological warfare that can "target" specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool.“
* *
*
*
One of the first journalists, Neil MacKay, to show PNAC's plans for the invasion of Iraq had been detailed before the September 11 attacks, mentions and analyzes this quote in his 2006 book War Against Truth.Neil MacKay, "Former Bush Aide: US Plotted Iraq Invasion Long Before 9/11", The Wisdom Fund, Scottish Sunday Herald January 11, 2004, accessed June 1, 2007. *
Thomas Hartmann shows that the implications of this quote are an analyzation of the potential political profit of this "politically useful tool" which is discussed in R.A.D., but nowhere are the effects on its' "targets" mentioned in PNAC's main strategic blueprint. *
* 2A02:8388:1845:7400:A4D6:2DD2:E150:F130 (talk) 09:53, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. – Levivich 00:32, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 9 May 2019