Talk:Christian Peacemaker Teams

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Religion / Interfaith (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Interfaith work group.
 
WikiProject Christianity / Anabaptist (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Anabaptist work group (marked as Mid-importance).
 
WikiProject Palestine (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Tom Fox[edit]

The Tom Fox link was linking top the singer on an internal link. I took the brackets out. I added his blog as an extenal link.

I moved the blog link to the page about him at Tom Fox (peace worker). --Saforrest 02:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Freed in Iraq![edit]

What a relief for them and their families! I'm deeply sorry that Tom Fox wasn't with them. Armon 13:23, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

It would have been nice, though, for CPT to acknowledge the people who risked their lives to save them. They reported that the hostages were 'released'; actually they were rescued by real people, who should be commended for working so hard, and risking so much, to save people who do nothing but criticize them. 68.117.0.64
Are you suggesting that the criticism is unwarranted? Or that what they have previously criticized them for is now rendered null and void because they rescued them? ("Well gee mister, you conducted a war of aggression - after 10 years of brutal sanctions - ruined a whole country, detained innocent people without charge, probably killed thousands of innocent people, flattened whole cities, used illegal weapons, systematically tortured people and so on and so forth BUT now that you've saved my bacon you're A-OK!") - LamontCranston 02:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
I think you're a bit mixed up. Saddam Hussein didn't rescue them -he's currently on trial for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Armon 00:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
You are the mixed up one if you think that satirical quote was directed at Saddam Hussein or his regime. Now aside from all that and your condemnation of their legitimate criticism of the US government - indeed very likely you condemn any form of criticism, maybe there ought to be law a against it! - you fail to realise one basic fact: that as avowed pacifists they're obviously not going to thank someone for using force to rescue them, a difficult position certainly but their right. LamontCranston 12:22, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Hey, relax, buddy. Take a load off, guy. You need a rest, fella. Armon 12:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
That's a fantastic response! LamontCranston 00:50, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
are you for real? what you are doing has nothing to do with christianity. it is a political statement by people who support ungodly regimes that kill and torture people. as a christian i have no problem with you doing anything you want but i do have a problem with you doing it under the guise of christianity and with your endangering the lives of our young men and women simply so you can take a stand against the u.s. who gives you the rights you have. please stop this nonsense. User:T L Roberts
Good point, looks a lot like Stockholm syndrome. I don't believe it deserves a death sentence though. Armon 00:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
If you think what CPT is doing has nothing to do with Christianity then I suggest you go brush up on the Gospels and the teachings of Jesus, or at bare minimum their denominations of Christianity. As for "support[ing] ungodly regimes that kill and torture people" – if you are talking about the very people who have the chutzpah to remove him from power after they put him in control in the first place and supported him during his worst crimes then that is a perfectly legitimate statement for which there is ample evidence however if you are talking about CPT supporting Saddam Hussein that is going to require some proof. And I will not dwell on the 'ungodly' part. How is CPT “endangering the lives of our young men and women”? First of all their dispute is not with the soldiers on the ground, they do not want them endangered, injured or killed any more than they want the Iraqis endangered, injured or killed, their dispute is with the US government and its illegal actions – a good way to not endanger, injure or kill both US soldiers in Iraq and Iraqis would be for the illegal occupying American army to leave - can you please provide evidence that an avowed pacifist group is calling for US soldiers to be put in danger [presumably you mean endangered, injured or killed]? And what exactly are they doing that you consider to be ‘nonsense’? LamontCranston 12:06, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Article References[edit]

Tonight I started to move the references in this article into a more consistant and standard format. There is still a good deal of work to do. First off I'm sure I missed some. Second, the web links need to be checked to make sure they are still active, and then marked with a date (see the Columbia reference for an example). I'll try to do some myself over the coming days, but it's always good to have another set of eyes. --Ahc 06:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Discover the networks[edit]

Discover the networks is not an acceptable link per our WP:EL policy. Please consider removing it. Hipocrite - «Talk» 18:57, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll second that, they are a clearly biased source, that pretends to be revealing the whole truth. --Ahc 03:48, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
As a follow up I just went through and removed articles about the hostage crisis in Iraq (not realy helpful here, prehaps on the article about that event), and other particullar stories of CPT work. My sense is that this article should cover general CPT activies more then specific programs. I also removed the Discover teh Networks links for the reason I gave above. When I was done, only the CPT home page remained. --Ahc 04:04, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

NGO Monitor[edit]

NGO Monitor is not an acceptable reference per our WP:EL policy. This is a clearly biased Israeli organisation that only "monitors" NGOs that they believe are at times critical of Israeli government policy. See their website: "NGO Monitor's objective is to end to the practice used by certain self-declared 'humanitarian NGOs' of exploiting the label 'universal human rights values' to promote politically and ideologically motivated anti-Israel agendas." Please consider removing this reference. -- --MrAtoz

I think given that the NGO Monitor is cited as a source of criticism that it's okay. However, I do think that section could stand to be reworded to be more clear that the cited source should not be considered unbiased. --Ahc 16:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Citing location for further research[edit]

{{helpme} — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrsSimons (talkcontribs) 13:11, 16 September 2011 (UTC) I added a post to the further reading section to help direct people to a great archive of primary sources about this organization. But I wasn't sure if this was the ideal place to put it. I'm kind of new to wikipedia, does anyone have any suggestions — Preceding unsigned comment added by MrsSimons (talkcontribs) 20:05, 15 September 2011 (UTC)