Talk:Paul R. Pillar

message: why does this entry seem like a debate on the value of his work and life, and an attempt to discredit pillar's public standing? i think that wikipedia is so concerned with attempts to not seem biased to the political left, that right-wingers have tarnished the historical and social entries. stop being scared editors, if wikipedians are upset because you don't include their revisionist histories and apologies, too bad. you have no problem preventing the left from skewing wikipedia; in the interest of science and fact, let's have a little more policing of the right.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.224.61 (talk) 14:27, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: None I could find in VIPS' materials. I think a revert may be in order soon. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 20:55, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  VIPS? 

message: The following is well sourced and clearly written:
:Pillar also wrote that "secular" Baathists in Iraq would never cooperate with fundamentalists like al-Qaeda, but the cooperation between Abu Musab al Zarqawi and the Baathists in Iraq has been very strong. 
csloat, you are deleting this passage without cause.  The Wall Street Journal is clear on this criticism.  I have given you the exact quotation where this comment comes from.  Please explain why you are continuing to delete this entry. RonCram 20:58, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: RonCram please re-read my comments above; I have explained the deletion clearly and you have not refuted (nor even acknowledged) my argument on this point.  I have never suggested I didn't know where the comment came from.  Please stop distorting my words.  I will leave the comment in since you insist on it, making the necessary changes to explain context.--csloat 21:19, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pillar's view of Baathists and Islamic terrorists

message: csloat, you have reinserted the ((fact)) tag after the citation was given.  You know well enough that the Wall Street Journal criticized Pillar for doing a poor job in assessing the terrorist threat.  I have even quoted the exact passage for you here on the Talk page.  For you to reinsert the ((fact)) when the citation is already on the page seems ridiculous to me.  Do you really want me to put the same citation is multiple places?  If so, I will do it but it seems cumbersome and not in the best interest of wikipedia to do so. RonCram 21:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please cite the passage where the WSJ specifically notes that "Pillar has a poor track record in assessing the terrorist threat."  Otherwise it is just your editorial comment based on something - it's not clear what - that is said in the WSJ article.--csloat 21:20, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please the following passage found in the Wall Street Journal editorial: "None of this is surprising in the case of Mr. Pillar, who is also trying to protect his own lousy track record in misjudging the terrorist threat."  RonCram 00:05, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL, don't know how I missed that, I guess I was looking for the word "poor."  Thanks.--csloat 02:52, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Citation Needed" tags

message: I have not removed the ridiculous statement by some unknown blogger to the effect of Pillar's actions being illegal and worthy of prosecution, but I think it should be removed.  If anyone would like to defend it here please do so; otherwise, it goes.  I am not opposed to having published criticism from reputable sources here, but random and obviously false statements from unknown (and pseudonymous) bloggers that received absolutely no media attention in the year and a half since they wrote it do not seem encyclopedic.--csloat 23:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Can we remove false speculation by "dinocrat"?

message: Nightline is going to report on the "Saddam Tapes."  
:Reportedly armed with 12 hours of Saddam Hussein's audio recordings, the organizers of an upcoming "Intelligence Summit" are describing the tapes as the "smoking gun evidence" that the Iraqi dictator possessed weapons of mass destruction in the period leading up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has already authenticated the tapes.  These are the same tapes mentioned in Duelfer's Report that had not been translated at the time of the report.  For some reason, the tapes were released through a very unusual manner - possibly because some in the intelligence community did not want the truth to come out. Read news story here.    
The story also reports:
:On Tuesday night, Loftus praised a Cybercast News Service article published on Oct. 4, 2004, entitled Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties. The exclusive report featured documents showing numerous efforts by Saddam Hussein's regime to work with some of the world's most notorious terror organizations, including al Qaeda, to target Americans. 
:The documents also demonstrate that Saddam's government possessed mustard gas and anthrax, both considered weapons of mass destruction, in the summer of 2000, during the period in which United Nations weapons inspectors were not present in Iraq. The papers showed that Iraq trained dozens of terrorists inside its borders.
The Nightline story about the tapes is important to the Pillar article because Pillar was one of the CIA cabal who did not want any intelligence tying Saddam to WMD or al-Qaeda to come out causing the tapes to come out through an unofficial path.
Read the story here. RonCram 19:08, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  All editors should watch Nightline tonight, Feb. 15 

message: I removed the following but left the direct quote from the writer:
:"Joscelyn then discusses Pillar misstatements regarding the operational relationship between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. The Senate Report on PreWar Intelligence documented several instances of a working relationship, including chemical weapons development and Iraqi training of al-Qaeda terrorists. These and other instances were also written about by Michael Scheuer, the head of the CIA unit responsible for catching Osama bin Laden in his 2002 book title "Through Our Enemies' Eyes." "
RonCram, please stop adding your opinion as fact. I will continue to remove your edits if you refuse to make NPOV edits.--Jersey Devil 15:14, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Jersey Devil, you are correct that this is not a political blog or forum.  However, I fail to see how allowing Joscelyn to express his criticism of Pillar makes the entry POV.  The entry as it stands now is cryptic and entirely unhelpful to readers.  However, in the interest of seeking a concensus, I will review Joscelyn's piece and try a rewrite you may find more acceptable. RonCram 18:48, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Even worse. In order to discredit Pillar, Joscelyn maintains the myth that Michael Scheuer found evidence of a partnership between Saddam and al-Qaeda. But Michael Scheuer himself(!) denies having found any evidence. Moreover, he has openly denied it since 2004(!) (see Michael Scheuer) which is two years prior to Joscelyn's 2006 smear article against Pillar. If quoting Joscelyn's articles is informative on anything, it is on his fabrication of lies. Wikipedia is not a vehicle of Weekly Standard or its campaigns. -- ActiveSelective 01:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, Scheuer's 2002 book Through Our Enemies' Eyes clearly shows he believes Saddan and al-Qaeda were closely linked. Scheuer changed his view sometime between the publication of his first book and his TV interviews.  I suggest you look at Scheuer's quotes in wikiquote.  RonCram 01:40, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right; Scheuer changed his opinion after looking at the evidence in an official capacity for the CIA, as you know.  This occurred roughly 2 years prior to Joscelyn's smear, which is why ActiveSelective is quite correct that Joscelyn is either a nincompoop or a flat out liar on this issue.--csloat 02:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV Commentary

message: An image used in this article, File:Intelligence and U.S. Foreign Policy.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 24 December 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:40, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Intelligence and U.S. Foreign Policy.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: An image used in this article, File:Terrorism and U.S. Foreign Policy.gif, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 27 March 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Terrorism and U.S. Foreign Policy.gif)
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:08, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Terrorism and U.S. Foreign Policy.gif Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Paul R. Pillar. 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/20160304085619/http://www.brookings.edu/experts/pillarp?view=bio to http://www.brookings.edu/experts/pillarp?view=bio
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131112054255/http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/experts/p/pillarp/paul%20pillar%20cv to http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/experts/p/pillarp/paul%20pillar%20cv
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071110203614/http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060301faessay85202/paul-r-pillar/intelligence-policy-and-the-war-in-iraq.html to http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060301faessay85202/paul-r-pillar/intelligence-policy-and-the-war-in-iraq.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080223203312/http://www.creators.com/opinion/robert-novak/a-rogue-cia.html to http://www.creators.com/opinion/robert-novak/a-rogue-cia.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060427164516/http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20010901fabook5580/paul-r-pillar/terrorism-and-u-s-foreign-policy.html to http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20010901fabook5580/paul-r-pillar/terrorism-and-u-s-foreign-policy.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071006191529/http://www.irri-kiib.be/speechnotes/06/060213-jihad.terr/pillar.htm to http://www.irri-kiib.be/speechnotes/06/060213-jihad.terr/pillar.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080302185855/http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20080301fareviewessay87211/paul-r-pillar/intelligent-design.html?mode=print to http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20080301fareviewessay87211/paul-r-pillar/intelligent-design.html?mode=print
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:53, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)